↓ Skip to main content

Mobile phone messaging for communicating results of medical investigations

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
264 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
Mobile phone messaging for communicating results of medical investigations
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007456.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ipek Gurol-Urganci, Thyra de Jongh, Vlasta Vodopivec-Jamsek, Josip Car, Rifat Atun

Abstract

Mobile phone messaging, such as Short Message Service (SMS) and Multimedia Message Service (MMS), has rapidly grown into a mode of communication with a wide range of applications, including communicating the results from medical investigations to patients. Alternative modes of communication of results include face-to-face communication, postal messages, calls to landlines or mobile phones, through web-based health records and email. Possible advantages of mobile phone messaging include convenience to both patients and healthcare providers, reduced waiting times for health services and healthcare costs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 264 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 4%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 245 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 18%
Researcher 45 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 16%
Student > Bachelor 24 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 7%
Other 49 19%
Unknown 38 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 88 33%
Psychology 33 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 11%
Social Sciences 23 9%
Computer Science 22 8%
Other 22 8%
Unknown 46 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 August 2012.
All research outputs
#6,509,563
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,826
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,074
of 118,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#72
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 118,843 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.