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 |
Electronic health records as a tool for recruitment of participants' clinical effectiveness research: lessons learned from tobacco cessation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Translational Behavioral Medicine, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13142-012-0143-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Fraser, Bruce A Christiansen, Robert Adsit, Timothy B Baker, Michael C Fiore |
| Abstract |
Translating tobacco dependence treatments that are effective in research settings into real-world clinical settings remains challenging. Electronic health record (EHR) technology can facilitate this process. This paper describes the accomplishments and lessons learned from a translational team science (clinic/research) approach to the development of an EHR tool for participant recruitment and clinic engagement in tobacco cessation research. All team stakeholders-research, clinical, and IT-were engaged in the design and planning of the project. Results over the first 17 months of the study showed that over one half of all smokers, coming in for any type of clinic appointment, were offered participation in the study, a very high level of adherent use of the EHR. Study recruitment over this period was 1,071 individuals, over 12 % of smokers in the participating clinics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 18% |
| Psychology | 4 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,245,883
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#736
of 988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,646
of 167,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#9
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 167,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.