| Title |
Building the case for actionable ethics in digital health research supported by artificial intelligence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, July 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-019-1377-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Camille Nebeker, John Torous, Rebecca J. Bartlett Ellis |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 | 19 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 13% |
| Canada | 6 | 10% |
| Serbia | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 37 | 61% |
| Scientists | 15 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 390 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 390 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 58 | 15% |
| Researcher | 38 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 36 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 6% |
| Other | 78 | 20% |
| Unknown | 118 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 49 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 21 | 5% |
| Other | 89 | 23% |
| Unknown | 130 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 09 December 2021.
All research outputs
#726,811
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#510
of 4,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,890
of 346,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#12
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 346,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.