↓ Skip to main content

Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
383 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002894.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Florence Gillaizeau, Ellis Chan, Ludovic Trinquart, Isabelle Colombet, RT Walton, Myriam Rège-Walther, Bernard Burnand, Pierre Durieux

Abstract

Maintaining therapeutic concentrations of drugs with a narrow therapeutic window is a complex task. Several computer systems have been designed to help doctors determine optimum drug dosage. Significant improvements in health care could be achieved if computer advice improved health outcomes and could be implemented in routine practice in a cost-effective fashion. This is an updated version of an earlier Cochrane systematic review, first published in 2001 and updated in 2008.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 383 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 363 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 70 18%
Student > Master 67 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 14%
Student > Bachelor 37 10%
Other 27 7%
Other 91 24%
Unknown 38 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 160 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 44 11%
Psychology 22 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 6%
Social Sciences 16 4%
Other 58 15%
Unknown 61 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 January 2014.
All research outputs
#1,319,361
of 15,046,681 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,646
of 11,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,391
of 186,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,046,681 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 186,540 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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 67% of its contemporaries.