↓ Skip to main content

A randomised controlled trial of blended learning to improve the newborn examination skills of medical students

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
A randomised controlled trial of blended learning to improve the newborn examination skills of medical students
Published in
Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition, June 2012
DOI 10.1136/archdischild-2011-301252
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Stewart, Garry Inglis, Luke Jardine, Pieter Koorts, Mark William Davies

Abstract

To evaluate the hypotheses that a blended learning approach would improve the newborn examination skills of medical students and yield a higher level of satisfaction with learning newborn examination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 95 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Professor 6 6%
Other 25 25%
Unknown 19 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 39%
Social Sciences 12 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Psychology 7 7%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 December 2019.
All research outputs
#7,960,512
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition
#1,025
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,820
of 180,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 180,633 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.