Search Results (1 to 10 of 1650 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 645 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 186 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 154 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 143 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 120 JMIR Formative Research
- 106 JMIR Research Protocols
- 56 JMIR Serious Games
- 33 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 29 JMIR Human Factors
- 26 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 24 JMIR Cancer
- 20 JMIR Aging
- 20 JMIR Mental Health
- 15 JMIR AI
- 14 JMIR Medical Education
- 12 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 9 JMIR Infodemiology
- 7 JMIR Dermatology
- 6 Iproceedings
- 6 JMIR Cardio
- 5 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 5 JMIR Diabetes
- 3 JMIR Nursing
- 3 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 2 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 1 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Chen et al [21] reported a higher alert rate of 3.12% and a lower acceptance rate of 48.88% over 2 years, with only 28.08% of accepted alerts leading to actual prescription changes. This lower modification rate may reflect the broader definition of acceptance used in their study, which included mere acknowledgment of alerts, as well as the absence of embedded diagnostic recommendations that directly address diagnostic omissions.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e70731
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Beyond Benchmarks: Evaluating Generalist Medical Artificial Intelligence With Psychometrics
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e70901
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Specifically, the sample size was calculated via the Hsu (with best) multiple comparison test by the Power Analysis and Sample Size 14, with α=.05, power=0.80, the MDs between different groups=6.139, and the common SD within a group was assumed to be 7.16, resulting in a total sample size of 138 (46 in each group). Accounting for a 10% dropout rate, the final sample size was planned to be 153 participants.
J Med Internet Res 2025;27:e71741
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section