| Title |
Orders- Versus Encounters-Based Image Capture: Implications Pre- and Post-Procedure Workflow, Technical and Build Capabilities, Resulting, Analytics and Revenue Capture: HIMSS-SIIM Collaborative White Paper
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Digital Imaging, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10278-016-9888-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dawn Cram, Christopher J. Roth, Alexander J. Towbin |
| Abstract |
The decision to implement an orders-based versus an encounters-based imaging workflow poses various implications to image capture and storage. The impacts include workflows before and after an imaging procedure, electronic health record build, technical infrastructure, analytics, resulting, and revenue. Orders-based workflows tend to favor some imaging specialties while others require an encounters-based approach. The intent of this HIMSS-SIIM white paper is to offer lessons learned from early adopting institutions to physician champions and informatics leadership developing strategic planning and operational rollouts for specialties capturing clinical multimedia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 | 14 | 54% |
| Canada | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 77% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 13 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 13 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,200,814
of 24,810,360 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Digital Imaging
#12
of 1,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,818
of 363,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Digital Imaging
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,810,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 363,075 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.