Skip to main content

Articles

Page 67 of 67

  1. This study advances the use of a utility model to model physician-patient interactions from the perspectives of physicians and patients.

    Authors: Steven R Feldman, G John Chen, Judy Y Hu and Alan B Fleischer
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2002 2:8
  2. Hepatic surgery is characterized by complicated operations with a significant peri- and postoperative risk for the patient. We developed a web-based, high-granular research database for comprehensive documenta...

    Authors: Martin Dugas, Rolf Schauer, Andreas Volk and Horst Rau
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2002 2:5
  3. Patient centred communication (PCC) has been described as a method for doctor-patient communication. The principles of shared decision making (SDM) have been proposed more recently.

    Authors: Michel Wensing, Glyn Elwyn, Adrian Edwards, Eric Vingerhoets and Richard Grol
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2002 2:2
  4. Classification of the electrocardiogram using Neural Networks has become a widely used method in recent years. The efficiency of these classifiers depends upon a number of factors including network training. U...

    Authors: Chris D Nugent, Jesus A Lopez, Ann E Smith and Norman D Black
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2002 2:1
  5. We conducted a review of the diagnostic accuracy of clinical examination for the diagnosis of cirrhosis. The objectives were: to identify studies assessing the accuracy of clinical examination in the detection...

    Authors: Guy de Bruyn and Edward A Graviss
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:6
  6. The use of telemedicine is growing, but its efficacy for achieving comparable or improved clinical outcomes has not been established in many medical specialties. The objective of this systematic review was to ...

    Authors: William R Hersh, Mark Helfand, James Wallace, Dale Kraemer, Patricia Patterson, Susan Shapiro and Merwyn Greenlick
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:5
  7. The specificity of clinical questions is gauged by explicit descriptions of four dimensions: subjects, interventions, comparators and outcomes of interest. This study determined whether adding simple instructi...

    Authors: Elmer V Villanueva, Elizabeth A Burrows, Paul A Fennessy, Meera Rajendran and Jeremy N Anderson
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:4
  8. To determine whether a computerized clinical documentation system (CDS): 1) decreased time spent charting and increased time spent in patient care; 2) decreased medication errors; 3) improved clinical decision...

    Authors: James A Menke, Cynthia W Broner, Deborah Y Campbell, Michelle Y McKissick and Joy A Edwards-Beckett
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:3
  9. Patients increasingly seek more active involvement in health care decisions, but little is known about how to communicate complex risk information to patients. The objective of this study was to elicit patient...

    Authors: Jennifer M Fortin, Linda K Hirota, Barbara E Bond, Annette M O'Connor and Nananda F Col
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:2
  10. Developments in information technology promise to revolutionise the delivery of health care by providing access to data in a timely and efficient way. Information technology also raises several important conce...

    Authors: Ross EG Upshur and Vivek Goel
    Citation: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2001 1:1

Annual Journal Metrics

  • 2022 Citation Impact
    3.5 - 2-year Impact Factor
    3.9 - 5-year Impact Factor
    1.384 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper)
    0.940 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

    2023 Speed
    37 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median)
    213 days submission to accept (Median)

    2023 Usage 
    2,588,758 downloads
    2,443 Altmetric mentions 

Peer-review Terminology

  • The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:

    Identity transparency: Single anonymized

    Reviewer interacts with: Editor

    Review information published: Review reports. Reviewer Identities reviewer opt in. Author/reviewer communication

    More information is available here

Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal