You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
What I wish I'd learned at dental school
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Dental Journal, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.602 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
G. R. Oliver, C. D. Lynch, B. L. Chadwick, A. Santini, N. H. F. Wilson |
| Abstract |
Background Much concern appears to exist as to the scope and content of contemporary dental school programmes, with the oft-cited criticism being made that dental graduates are 'no longer as good as they used to be'.Aim The aim of this project was to survey the views of dentists - both new graduates and more established practitioners - on aspects of their own dental school training they felt had been deficient as well as commenting on what aspects of dental school education they would like to see improved/enhanced in current times.Methods An invitation to complete an Internet-based questionnaire was emailed to the Fellows and Members of the Faculty of General Dental Practice (UK). Topics in the questionnaire included the respondent's own dental education history, how well they felt their dental school training had covered certain clinical and non-clinical topics; and their opinions on areas they felt should be included in contemporary dental school programmes.Results Six hundred and forty-nine responses were received from 3,348 emailed invitations (response rate = 19.4%). Sixty-one percent (395) of respondents were qualified for 10 years or more. Among clinical skills and techniques, a majority of respondents reported they felt they had not had sufficient teaching/training in dental school in surgical endodontics (76%), conscious sedation (72%), root surface debridement (71%), fixed orthodontic appliances (68%), porcelain veneers (63%), implants (56%) and posterior composites (53%). If designing a new dental school programme, the most common topics respondents would seek to include/increase were business and practice management (21%), communication skills (including patient management and leadership skills) (10%), and increased clinical time and experience (8%).Conclusions The findings of this project are of interest and relevance to those working with student dentists and young dental practitioners. A greater emphasis is needed on the teaching of certain non-clinical subjects such as business and communication skills, while within clinical subjects there is need to refine and expand teaching in identified areas such as exodontia and endodontics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 50% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,381,871
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from British Dental Journal
#4,339
of 6,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,032
of 338,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Dental Journal
#61
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,048 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 338,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.