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 |
An empirically-derived approach for investigating Health Information Technology: the Elementally Entangled Organisational Communication (EEOC) framework
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-68 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Andrew Georgiou, Johanna I Westbrook, Jeffrey Braithwaite |
Abstract |
The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the Elementally Entangled Organisational Communication (EEOC) framework by drawing on a set of three case studies which assessed the impact of new Health Information Technology (HIT) on a pathology service. The EEOC framework was empirically developed as a tool to tackle organisational communication challenges in the implementation and evaluation of health information systems. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 Kingdom | 3 | 38% |
India | 2 | 25% |
United States | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 50% |
Scientists | 2 | 25% |
Members of the public | 2 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 5% |
Unknown | 63 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 26% |
Student > Master | 13 | 20% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
Other | 5 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
Other | 14 | 21% |
Unknown | 7 | 11% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 20% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 12 | 18% |
Computer Science | 8 | 12% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
Social Sciences | 7 | 11% |
Other | 11 | 17% |
Unknown | 8 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 October 2014.
All research outputs
#7,018,505
of 25,035,235 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#629
of 2,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,263
of 169,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#16
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,035,235 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,124 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 169,617 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.