↓ Skip to main content

Should Electronic Health Record-Derived Social and Behavioral Data Be Used in Precision Medicine Research?

Overview of attention for article published in The AMA Journal of Ethic, September 2018
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 (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Should Electronic Health Record-Derived Social and Behavioral Data Be Used in Precision Medicine Research?
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, September 2018
DOI 10.1001/amajethics.2018.873
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brittany Hollister, Vence L Bonham

Abstract

Precision medicine research initiatives aim to use participants' electronic health records (EHRs) to obtain rich longitudinal data for large-scale precision medicine studies. Although EHRs vary widely in their inclusion and formatting of social and behavioral data, these data are essential to investigating genetic and social factors in health disparities. We explore possible biases in collecting, using, and interpreting EHR-based social and behavioral data in precision medicine research and their consequences for health equity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 21 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Psychology 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 21 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,722,567
of 25,992,468 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,082
of 348,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,992,468 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 1 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 348,897 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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