Cited by 13Electronic Health Records SystemsDistributed systems and fault toleranceUsability and User Interface Design

Special Issue: CSCW and Dependable Healthcare Systems

Procter, Rob, Rouncefield, Mark, Balka, Ellen, Berg, Marc·2007·Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10606-006-9037-9

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Procter, R., Rouncefield, M., Balka, E., & Berg, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • Simon Fraser University (CA)
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Procter, Rob
Venue
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)
Published
2007-01-06
Volume
15
Issue
5-6
Pages
413-418
ISSN
  • 0925-9724 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7551
OpenAlex
W2124318542
Cited by
13
References
5
Citations by year
2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed systems and fault tolerance
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
computer-supported cooperative work, health information systems, dependability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review