| Title |
What do healthcare professionals need to turn risk models for type 2 diabetes into usable computerized clinical decision support systems? Lessons learned from the MOSAIC project
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-019-0887-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giuseppe Fico, Liss Hernanzez, Jorge Cancela, Arianna Dagliati, Lucia Sacchi, Antonio Martinez-Millana, Jorge Posada, Lidia Manero, Jose Verdú, Andrea Facchinetti, Manuel Ottaviano, Konstantia Zarkogianni, Konstantina Nikita, Leif Groop, Rafael Gabriel-Sanchez, Luca Chiovato, Vicente Traver, Juan Francisco Merino-Torres, Claudio Cobelli, Riccardo Bellazzi, Maria Teresa Arredondo |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 44% |
| Finland | 1 | 11% |
| Italy | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 10% |
| Engineering | 8 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 January 2022.
All research outputs
#4,055,450
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#352
of 2,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,906
of 312,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,001 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 312,255 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.