↓ Skip to main content

Electronic Health Records’ Limited Successes Suggest More Targeted Uses

Overview of attention for article published in Health Affairs, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
connotea
2 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Electronic Health Records’ Limited Successes Suggest More Targeted Uses
Published in
Health Affairs, April 2010
DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.1086
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Understanding whether electronic health records, as currently adopted, improve quality and efficiency has important implications for how best to employ the estimated $20 billion in health information technology incentives authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We examined electronic health record adoption in U.S. hospitals and the relationship to quality and efficiency. Across a large number of metrics examined, the relationships were modest at best and generally lacked statistical or clinical significance. However, the presence of clinical decision support was associated with small quality gains. Our findings suggest that to drive substantial gains in quality and efficiency, simply adopting electronic health records is likely to be insufficient. Instead, policies are needed that encourage the use of electronic health records in ways that will lead to improvements in care.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 9 4%
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 222 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 14%
Researcher 25 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 8%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Other 66 28%
Unknown 31 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 24%
Computer Science 41 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 27 11%
Social Sciences 24 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 8%
Other 32 14%
Unknown 38 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 31 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,559,808
of 32,332,113 outputs
Outputs from Health Affairs
#2,491
of 6,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,978
of 136,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Affairs
#23
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,332,113 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 6,952 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 69.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 136,971 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 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.