| Title |
Not Perfect, but Better: Primary Care Providers’ Experiences with Electronic Referrals in a Safety Net Health System
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-009-0955-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yeuen Kim, Alice Hm Chen, Ellen Keith, Hal F. Yee, Margot B. Kushel |
| Abstract |
Electronic referrals can improve access to subspecialty care in safety net settings. In January 2007, San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH) launched an electronic referral portal that incorporated subspecialist triage, iterative communication with referring providers, and existing electronic health record data to improve access to subspecialty care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 16% |
| Researcher | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 14% |
| Other | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 37 | 23% |
| Unknown | 26 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 36% |
| Computer Science | 18 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 8% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 11% |
| Unknown | 33 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2014.
All research outputs
#6,388,035
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,570
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,148
of 95,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#17
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.