↓ Skip to main content

Use of Simulation to Study Nurses’ Acceptance and Nonacceptance of Clinical Decision Support Suggestions

Overview of attention for article published in Computers, informatics, nursing, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
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
Use of Simulation to Study Nurses’ Acceptance and Nonacceptance of Clinical Decision Support Suggestions
Published in
Computers, informatics, nursing, October 2015
DOI 10.1097/cin.0000000000000185
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Our long-term goal was to ensure nurse clinical decision support works as intended before full deployment in clinical practice. As part of a broader effort, this pilot project explored factors influencing acceptance/nonacceptance of eight clinical decision support suggestions displayed in an electronic health record-based nursing plan of care software prototype. A diverse sample of 21 nurses participated in this high-fidelity clinical simulation experience and completed a questionnaire to assess reasons for accepting/not accepting the clinical decision support suggestions. Of 168 total suggestions displayed during the experiment (eight for each of the 21 nurses), 123 (73.2%) were accepted, and 45 (26.8%) were not accepted. The mode number of acceptances by nurses was seven of eight, with only two of 21 nurses accepting all. The main reason for clinical decision support acceptance was the nurse's belief that the suggestions were good for the patient (100%), with other features providing secondary reinforcement. Reasons for nonacceptance were less clear, with fewer than half of the subjects indicating low confidence in the evidence. This study provides preliminary evidence that high-quality simulation and targeted questionnaires about specific clinical decision support selections offer a cost-effective means for testing before full deployment in clinical practice.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 112 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 37 32%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 29 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 12%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Computer Science 6 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 40 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 November 2015.
All research outputs
#24,152,506
of 34,454,098 outputs
Outputs from Computers, informatics, nursing
#560
of 1,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,799
of 312,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Computers, informatics, nursing
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,454,098 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,722 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 312,049 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.