| Title |
Predictive Validity Evidence for Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument Scores: Quality of Submissions to JGIM’s Medical Education Special Issue
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-008-0664-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Darcy A. Reed, Thomas J. Beckman, Scott M. Wright, Rachel B. Levine, David E. Kern, David A. Cook |
| Abstract |
Deficiencies in medical education research quality are widely acknowledged. Content, internal structure, and criterion validity evidence support the use of the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) to measure education research quality, but predictive validity evidence has not been explored. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Georgia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 8% |
| Researcher | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 67 | 38% |
| Unknown | 26 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 89 | 50% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 11% |
| Unknown | 35 | 20% |
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 26 February 2014.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6,057
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,794
of 84,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#60
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 84,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.