↓ Skip to main content

Teaching Medical Students about Communicating with Patients with Major Mental Illness

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, June 2006
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
Title
Teaching Medical Students about Communicating with Patients with Major Mental Illness
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, June 2006
DOI 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00521.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa I. Iezzoni, Radhika A. Ramanan, Stacey Lee

Abstract

Persons with major mental illness often have chronic diseases and poor physical health. Therefore, all practicing physicians should learn about communicating effectively with these patients. Few efforts to teach medical students communication skills have specifically targeted patients with major mental illness. Indeed, most of the limited literature on this topic is decades old, predating significant scientific advances in cognitive neuroscience and psychiatric therapeutics and changes in social policies regarding major mental illness. To gather preliminary insight into training needs, we interviewed 13 final-year students from 2 Boston medical schools. Students' observations coalesced around 4 themes: fears and anxieties about interacting with persons with major mental illness; residents "protecting" students from patients with major mental illness; lack of clinical maturity; and barriers to learning during psychiatry rotations. Educational researchers must explore ways to better prepare young physicians to communicate effectively with patients with major mental illness.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 20 25%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 25%
Psychology 13 16%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 20 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 August 2022.
All research outputs
#5,339,368
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,197
of 8,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,911
of 86,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#49
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 86,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.