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 |
Community-level determinants of obesity: harnessing the power of electronic health records for retrospective data analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-14-36 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caryn Roth, Randi E Foraker, Philip RO Payne, Peter J Embi |
| Abstract |
Obesity and overweight are multifactorial diseases that affect two thirds of Americans, lead to numerous health conditions and deeply strain our healthcare system. With the increasing prevalence and dangers associated with higher body weight, there is great impetus to focus on public health strategies to prevent or curb the disease. Electronic health records (EHRs) are a powerful source for retrospective health data, but they lack important community-level information known to be associated with obesity. We explored linking EHR and community data to study factors associated with overweight and obesity in a systematic and rigorous way. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 42% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 17% |
| India | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 25% |
| Scientists | 2 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 23% |
| Researcher | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 20% |
| Unknown | 16 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 28% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 24 | 21% |
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 27 May 2014.
All research outputs
#4,034,557
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#353
of 1,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,451
of 227,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 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 1,985 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 227,621 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.