| Title |
Comparison of the Complexity of Patients Seen by Different Medical Subspecialists in a Universal Health Care System
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA Network Open, November 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.4852 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcello Tonelli, Natasha Wiebe, Braden J. Manns, Scott W. Klarenbach, Matthew T. James, Pietro Ravani, Neesh Pannu, Jonathan Himmelfarb, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 846 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 | 182 | 22% |
| Spain | 60 | 7% |
| Mexico | 59 | 7% |
| Canada | 53 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 51 | 6% |
| France | 28 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 24 | 3% |
| Australia | 21 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 10 | 1% |
| Other | 90 | 11% |
| Unknown | 268 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 567 | 67% |
| Scientists | 143 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 123 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 13 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 207 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 31 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 10% |
| Other | 20 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 16 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 23% |
| Unknown | 58 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 94 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 1% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 20 | 10% |
| Unknown | 74 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 657. 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 01 March 2024.
All research outputs
#33,452
of 25,789,020 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Network Open
#360
of 9,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#598
of 448,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Network Open
#9
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,789,020 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 9,935 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 128.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 448,710 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 181 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.