| Title |
Promoting improved utilization of laboratory testing through changes in an electronic medical record: experience at an academic medical center
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-015-0137-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew D Krasowski, Deborah Chudzik, Anna Dolezal, Bryan Steussy, Michael P Gailey, Benjamin Koch, Sara B Kilborn, Benjamin W Darbro, Carolyn D Rysgaard, Julia A Klesney-Tait |
| Abstract |
This case study over time describes five years of experience with interventions to improve laboratory test utilization at an academic medical center. The high-frequency laboratory tests showing the biggest declines in order volume post intervention were serum albumin (36%) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (17%). Introduction of restrictions for 170 high-cost send-out tests resulted in a 23% decline in order volume. Targeted interventions reduced mis-orders involving several "look-alike" tests: 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, 25-hydroxyvitamin D; manganese, magnesium; beta-2-glycoprotein, beta-2-microglobulin. Lastly, targeted alerts reduced duplicate orders of germline genetic testing and orders of hepatitis B surface antigen within 2 weeks of hepatitis B vaccination. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 5 | 56% |
| India | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 130 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 22 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 24% |
| Unknown | 22 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 December 2019.
All research outputs
#6,654,273
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#571
of 2,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,397
of 270,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#7
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 270,408 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 70% of its contemporaries.