| Title |
Impact of scribes on patient interaction, productivity, and revenue in a cardiology clinic: a prospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceor.s49010 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan J Bank, Christopher Obetz, Ann Konrardy, Akbar Khan, Kamalesh M Pillai, Benjamin J McKinley, Ryan M Gage, Mark A Turnbull, William O Kenney |
| Abstract |
Scribes have been used in the emergency department to improve physician productivity and patient interaction. There are no controlled, prospective studies of scribe use in the clinic setting. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 12 | 71% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 41% |
| Scientists | 5 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 24% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 54 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 18% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 08 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,300,985
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#33
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,964
of 210,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 210,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.