Title |
The freetext matching algorithm: a computer program to extract diagnoses and causes of death from unstructured text in electronic health records
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, August 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-88 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Anoop D Shah, Carlos Martinez, Harry Hemingway |
Abstract |
Electronic health records are invaluable for medical research, but much information is stored as free text rather than in a coded form. For example, in the UK General Practice Research Database (GPRD), causes of death and test results are sometimes recorded only in free text. Free text can be difficult to use for research if it requires time-consuming manual review. Our aim was to develop an automated method for extracting coded information from free text in electronic patient records. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 8 | 38% |
United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
India | 2 | 10% |
Canada | 1 | 5% |
Spain | 1 | 5% |
Argentina | 1 | 5% |
Unknown | 5 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 14 | 67% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 24% |
Scientists | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 5 | 4% |
United States | 2 | 2% |
Canada | 2 | 2% |
Unknown | 106 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 34 | 30% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 22% |
Student > Master | 13 | 11% |
Other | 11 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
Other | 10 | 9% |
Unknown | 15 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 37% |
Computer Science | 17 | 15% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 3% |
Other | 16 | 14% |
Unknown | 28 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 13 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,534,883
of 24,337,175 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#71
of 2,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,008
of 169,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#3
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,337,175 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. 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 169,442 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 96% of its contemporaries.