↓ Skip to main content

The Computer-based Health Evaluation Software (CHES): a software for electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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.
Title
The Computer-based Health Evaluation Software (CHES): a software for electronic patient-reported outcome monitoring
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-12-126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernhard Holzner, Johannes M Giesinger, Jakob Pinggera, Stefan Zugal, Felix Schöpf, Anne S Oberguggenberger, Eva M Gamper, August Zabernigg, Barbara Weber, Gerhard Rumpold

Abstract

Patient-reported Outcomes (PROs) capturing e.g., quality of life, fatigue, depression, medication side-effects or disease symptoms, have become important outcome parameters in medical research and daily clinical practice. Electronic PRO data capture (ePRO) with software packages to administer questionnaires, storing data, and presenting results has facilitated PRO assessment in hospital settings. Compared to conventional paper-pencil versions of PRO instruments, ePRO is more economical with regard to staff resources and time, and allows immediate presentation of results to the medical staff.The objective of our project was to develop software (CHES - Computer-based Health Evaluation System) for ePRO in hospital settings and at home with a special focus on the presentation of individual patient's results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
Brazil 2 2%
Norway 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 87 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 31%
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 9 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 34%
Psychology 17 17%
Computer Science 12 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 12 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 November 2014.
All research outputs
#2,107,933
of 12,409,138 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#220
of 1,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,178
of 138,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#34
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,138 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 1,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 138,864 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.