↓ Skip to main content

Residency program trainee-satisfaction correlate with results of the European board examination in neurosurgery

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neurochirurgica, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Residency program trainee-satisfaction correlate with results of the European board examination in neurosurgery
Published in
Acta Neurochirurgica, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00701-016-2917-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin N. Stienen, David Netuka, Andreas K. Demetriades, Florian Ringel, Oliver P. Gautschi, Jens Gempt, Dominique Kuhlen, Karl Schaller

Abstract

Substantial country differences in neurosurgical training throughout Europe have recently been described, ranging from subjective rating of training quality to objective working hours per week. The aim of this study was to analyse whether these differences translate into the results of the written and oral part of the European Board Examination in Neurological Surgery (EBE-NS). Country-specific composite scores for satisfaction with quality of theoretical and practical training, as well as working hours per week, were obtained from an electronic survey distributed among European neurosurgical residents between June 2014 and March 2015. These were related to anonymous country-specific results of the EBE-NS between 2009 and 2016, using uni- and multivariate linear regression analysis. A total of n = 1025 written and n = 63 oral examination results were included. There was a significant linear relationship between the country-specific EBE-NS result in the written part and the country-specific composite score for satisfaction with quality of theoretical training [adjusted regression coefficient (RC) -3.80, 95 % confidence interval (CI) -5.43-7 -2.17, p < 0.001], but not with practical training or working time. For the oral part, there was a linear relationship between the country-specific EBE-NS result and the country-specific composite score for satisfaction with quality of practical training (RC 9.47, 95 % CI 1.47-17.47, p = 0.021), however neither with satisfaction with quality of theoretical training nor with working time. With every one-step improvement on the country-specific satisfaction score for theoretical training, the score in the EBE-NS Part 1 increased by 3.8 %. With every one-step improvement on the country-specific satisfaction score for practical training, the score in the EBE-NS Part 2 increased by 9.47 %. Improving training conditions is likely to have a direct positive influence on the knowledge level of trainees, as measured by the EBE-NS. The effect of the actual working time on the theoretical and practical knowledge of neurosurgical trainees appears to be insignificant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Professor 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 45%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#5,635,523
of 23,570,677 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neurochirurgica
#325
of 1,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,818
of 358,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neurochirurgica
#2
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,570,677 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,972 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 358,319 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 93% of its contemporaries.