↓ Skip to main content

Biomedical informatics advancing the national health agenda: the AMIA 2015 year-in-review in clinical and consumer informatics

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 Mendeley
Title
Biomedical informatics advancing the national health agenda: the AMIA 2015 year-in-review in clinical and consumer informatics
Published in
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, August 2016
DOI 10.1093/jamia/ocw103
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kirk Roberts, Mary Regina Boland, Lisiane Pruinelli, Jina Dcruz, Andrew Berry, Mattias Georgsson, Rebecca Hazen, Raymond F Sarmiento, Uba Backonja, Kun-Hsing Yu, Yun Jiang, Patricia Flatley Brennan

Abstract

The field of biomedical informatics experienced a productive 2015 in terms of research. In order to highlight the accomplishments of that research, elicit trends, and identify shortcomings at a macro level, a 19-person team conducted an extensive review of the literature in clinical and consumer informatics. The result of this process included a year-in-review presentation at the American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium and a written report (see supplemental data). Key findings are detailed in the report and summarized here. This article organizes the clinical and consumer health informatics research from 2015 under 3 themes: the electronic health record (EHR), the learning health system (LHS), and consumer engagement. Key findings include the following: (1) There are significant advances in establishing policies for EHR feature implementation, but increased interoperability is necessary for these to gain traction. (2) Decision support systems improve practice behaviors, but evidence of their impact on clinical outcomes is still lacking. (3) Progress in natural language processing (NLP) suggests that we are approaching but have not yet achieved truly interactive NLP systems. (4) Prediction models are becoming more robust but remain hampered by the lack of interoperable clinical data records. (5) Consumers can and will use mobile applications for improved engagement, yet EHR integration remains elusive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 290 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 15%
Student > Master 42 14%
Researcher 30 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 16 5%
Other 56 19%
Unknown 72 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 53 18%
Social Sciences 38 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 32 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Other 40 14%
Unknown 88 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 15 June 2019.
All research outputs
#5,699,190
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
#1,473
of 3,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,477
of 366,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
#32
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,077 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 366,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.