↓ Skip to main content

Digital lecture recording: A cautionary tale

Overview of attention for article published in Nurse Education in Practice, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
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.
Title
Digital lecture recording: A cautionary tale
Published in
Nurse Education in Practice, August 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.nepr.2012.07.004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amy N.B. Johnston, Helen Massa, Thomas H.J. Burne

Abstract

Increasing application of information technology including web-based lectures and live-lecture recording appears to have many advantages for undergraduate nursing education. These include greater flexibility, opportunity for students to review content on demand and the improved academic management of increasing class sizes without significant increase in physical infrastructure. This study performed a quasi-experimental comparison between two groups of nursing students undertaking their first anatomy and physiology course, where one group was also provided access to streaming of recorded copies of the live lectures and the other did not. For the course in which recorded lectures were available student feedback indicated overwhelming support for such provision with 96% of students having accessed recorded lectures. There was only a weak relationship between access of recorded lectures and overall performance in the course. Interestingly, the nursing students who had access to the recorded lectures demonstrated significantly poorer overall academic performance (P < 0.001). Although this study did not specifically control for student demographics or other academic input, the data suggests that provision of recorded lectures requires improved and applied time management practices by students and caution on the part of the academic staff involved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
South Africa 3 2%
United States 2 1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 181 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 14%
Student > Master 23 12%
Researcher 21 11%
Lecturer 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Other 45 23%
Unknown 40 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 47 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 7%
Psychology 12 6%
Computer Science 8 4%
Other 46 24%
Unknown 45 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 06 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,811,917
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Nurse Education in Practice
#66
of 1,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,173
of 186,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nurse Education in Practice
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,344 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 186,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them