| Title |
Unintended Consequences of Machine Learning in Medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jama.2017.7797 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Federico Cabitza, Raffaele Rasoini, Gian Franco Gensini |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 766 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 | 213 | 28% |
| United Kingdom | 60 | 8% |
| Italy | 32 | 4% |
| Canada | 26 | 3% |
| Spain | 23 | 3% |
| France | 21 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 18 | 2% |
| Germany | 18 | 2% |
| Australia | 18 | 2% |
| Other | 85 | 11% |
| Unknown | 252 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 458 | 60% |
| Scientists | 185 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 98 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 24 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 820 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 820 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 132 | 16% |
| Researcher | 122 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 70 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 69 | 8% |
| Other | 55 | 7% |
| Other | 175 | 21% |
| Unknown | 197 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 203 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 91 | 11% |
| Engineering | 51 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 33 | 4% |
| Psychology | 24 | 3% |
| Other | 161 | 20% |
| Unknown | 257 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 554. 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 30 January 2024.
All research outputs
#44,392
of 25,770,491 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#910
of 36,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#904
of 328,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#18
of 390 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,770,491 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 328,639 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 390 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 95% of its contemporaries.