↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating a decision making system for cardiovascular dysautonomias diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Evaluating a decision making system for cardiovascular dysautonomias diagnosis
Published in
SpringerPlus, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-1730-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali Idri, Ilham Kadi

Abstract

Autonomic nervous system (ANS) is the part of the nervous system that is involved in homeostasis of the whole body functions. A malfunction in this system can lead to a cardiovascular dysautonomias. Hence, a set of dynamic tests are adopted in ANS units to diagnose and treat patients with cardiovascular dysautonomias. The purpose of this study is to develop and evaluate a decision tree based cardiovascular dysautonomias prediction system on a dataset collected from the ANS unit of the Moroccan university hospital Avicenne. We collected a dataset of 263 records from the ANS unit of the Avicenne hospital. This dataset was split into three subsets: training set (123 records), test set (55 records) and validation set (85 records). C4.5 decision tree algorithm was used in this study to develop the prediction system. Moreover, Java Enterprise Edition platform was used to implement a prototype of the developed system which was deployed in the Avicenne ANS unit so as to be clinically validated. The performance of the decision tree-based prediction system was evaluated by means of the error rate criterion. The error rates were measured for each classifier and have achieved an average value of 1.46, 2.24 and 0.89 % in training, test, and validation sets respectively. The results obtained were encouraging but further replicated studies are still needed to be performed in order to confirm the findings of this study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 24%
Lecturer 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 6 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 10%
Engineering 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 December 2016.
All research outputs
#18,490,948
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,261
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,257
of 396,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#116
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 396,909 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.