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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Modeling Disease Severity in Multiple Sclerosis Using Electronic Health Records
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0078927 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zongqi Xia, Elizabeth Secor, Lori B. Chibnik, Riley M. Bove, Suchun Cheng, Tanuja Chitnis, Andrew Cagan, Vivian S. Gainer, Pei J. Chen, Katherine P. Liao, Stanley Y. Shaw, Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, Peter Szolovits, Howard L. Weiner, Elizabeth W. Karlson, Shawn N. Murphy, Guergana K. Savova, Tianxi Cai, Susanne E. Churchill, Robert M. Plenge, Isaac S. Kohane, Philip L. De Jager |
| Abstract |
To optimally leverage the scalability and unique features of the electronic health records (EHR) for research that would ultimately improve patient care, we need to accurately identify patients and extract clinically meaningful measures. Using multiple sclerosis (MS) as a proof of principle, we showcased how to leverage routinely collected EHR data to identify patients with a complex neurological disorder and derive an important surrogate measure of disease severity heretofore only available in research settings. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| El Salvador | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Colombia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 113 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 17% |
| Researcher | 20 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Professor | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 22% |
| Unknown | 19 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 27% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 11% |
| Psychology | 9 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 19% |
| Unknown | 29 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 January 2015.
All research outputs
#2,389,202
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#30,510
of 194,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,467
of 212,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#823
of 5,143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,037 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 212,958 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.