| Title |
Physicians’ perception and attitude toward electronic medical record
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-3-63 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Parvin Lakbala, Kavoos Dindarloo |
| Abstract |
Implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR) system increases efficiency of health services, quality of care and patient satisfaction. Successful implementation of EMRs depends on many factors. The path to quality improvement and financial gain with EMRs lies in getting the greatest number of Physicians to use the system. The main objective of this research is to explore physicians, attitude and perceptions of importance EMRs function, anticipated utilization of EMR functions and also issue impact EMRs. The cross-sectional study was conducted on 133 specialist physicians of three teaching hospitals of Hormozgan Medical Sciences University. The most important finding in this study was the Entry/Display of Diagnoses and Medications (96.3%) and Prescription Alerts drug-drug, allergy and dose checking and formulary management (96.2%) were of greatest importance to respondents. Nuclear medicine, Time trended Clinical Data Display, decision support capabilities, and medical management reporting generated percentage suggesting less than weekly usage. Only a small number of respondents addressed physicians' resistance in compare to another issues impact on EMRs. Understanding physician perceptions and attitude will allow for the development of targeted education to demonstrate the advantages and implementation of EMRs in further and improve physician perceptions of EMRs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 33% |
| Argentina | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 19% |
| Researcher | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 49 | 21% |
| Unknown | 61 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 24 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 20% |
| Unknown | 64 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 September 2014.
All research outputs
#14,773,697
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#835
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,644
of 307,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#34
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 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 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 307,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.