↓ Skip to main content

[Recommendations on the use of telemedicine as applied to nutritional pathology].

Overview of attention for article published in Nutricion Hospitalaria, March 2022
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 (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
2 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
[Recommendations on the use of telemedicine as applied to nutritional pathology].
Published in
Nutricion Hospitalaria, March 2022
DOI 10.20960/nh.03923
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abad González, Ángel Luis, Civera Andrés, Miguel, Argente Pla, María, García Malpartida, Katherine, Olivares Alcolea, Josefina, Domínguez Escribano, José Ramón, Ferrer Gómez, Mercedes, González Boillos, Margarita, Hervás Abad, Elena, Negueruela Avella, Guillermo Iván, Urgelés Planella, Juan Ramón, Veses Martín, Silvia, Sánchez Juan, Carlos

Abstract

telemedicine can improve the standards of clinical care and use of resources. The COVID-19 pandemic has required its implementation in routine practice. For this reason, a group of endocrinologists from Valencia, Murcia and the Balearic Islands created a committee for its development. to establish recommendations in order to improve the quality of consultation in nutritional disorders, and to create indicators for its management. the Delphi methodology was followed with the participation of 13 professionals in order to reach the widest consensus. A 16-item questionnaire was distributed within 3 rounds: in the first round, the degree of consensus was established; in the second round, the participants responded to the posed questions after having access to the first-round results. Agreement was considered if ≥ 75 % participants reached consensus, while strong agreement was considered if consensus was reached by ≥ 90 %. In addition, quality indicators were established. In a third round, these indicators were developed. after 3 rounds and a revision 5 recommendations with strong agreement were established based on organizational aspects. Regarding administrative aspects, 6 recommendations with strong agreement were established while 4 recommendations reached the level of agreement. Eight quality indicators were selected and developed. this document compiles a list of recommendations about needs and requirements to be taken into account for a quality telematic consultation in patients with nutritional disorders. In addition, health care quality indicators have been created and developed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 1 50%
Student > Master 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 1 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,005,131
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from Nutricion Hospitalaria
#56
of 673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,215
of 439,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutricion Hospitalaria
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 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 673 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 439,342 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them