| Title |
Telemedicine versus face to face patient care: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2000
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd002098 |
| Authors |
Rosemary Currell, Christine Urquhart, Paul Wainwright, Ruth Lewis, Currell, Rosemary, Urquhart, Christine, Wainwright, Paul, Lewis, Ruth |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Grenada | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 545 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 5 | <1% |
| United States | 5 | <1% |
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | <1% |
| Unknown | 519 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 94 | 17% |
| Researcher | 74 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 49 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 31 | 6% |
| Other | 127 | 23% |
| Unknown | 105 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 192 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 51 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 41 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 40 | 7% |
| Psychology | 19 | 3% |
| Other | 77 | 14% |
| Unknown | 125 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 October 2014.
All research outputs
#3,823,709
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,424
of 12,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,092
of 39,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,749 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 39,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.