↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions of mistreatment among trainees vary at different stages of clinical training

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, January 2017
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 Mendeley
Title
Perceptions of mistreatment among trainees vary at different stages of clinical training
Published in
BMC Medical Education, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0853-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Afif N. Kulaylat, Danni Qin, Susie X. Sun, Christopher S. Hollenbeak, Jane R. Schubart, Antone J. Aboud, Donald J. Flemming, Peter W. Dillon, Edward R. Bollard, David C. Han

Abstract

Mistreatment of trainees remains a frequently reported phenomenon in medical education. One barrier to creating an educational culture of respect and professionalism may be a lack of alignment in the perceptions of mistreatment among different learners. Through the use of clinical vignettes, our aim was to assess the perceptions of trainees toward themes of potential mistreatment at different stages of training. Based on observations from external experts embedded in the clinical learning environment, six thematic areas of potential mistreatment were identified: verbal abuse, specialty-choice discrimination, non-educational tasks, withholding/denying learning opportunities, neglect and gender/racial insensitivity. Corresponding clinical vignettes were created and distributed to 1) medical students, 2) incoming interns, 3) residents/fellows. Perceptions of the appropriateness of the interactions depicted in the vignettes were measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Scores were categorized into neutral or appropriate (≤3) or inappropriate (i.e. mistreatment) (>3) and compared using chi-squared tests. Four hundred twenty seven trainees participated (182 students, 120 interns, 125 residents/fellows). Proportions of students perceiving mistreatment differed significantly from those of interns and residents/fellows in domains of verbal abuse, specialty discrimination and gender/racial insensitivity (p < 0.05). In scenarios comparing interns to residents/fellows, no significant differences were noted in perceptions of mistreatment in the domains of non-educational tasks, withholding learning and neglect. Perceptions of mistreatment differ at different developmental stages of medical training. After exposure to the clinical learning environment, perceptions of incoming interns did not differ from those of residents/fellows, implicating clinical rotations as a key period in indoctrinating students into the prevailing culture. More longitudinal studies are needed to confirm or better examine this phenomenon.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 181 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Researcher 15 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 40 22%
Unknown 70 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 8%
Social Sciences 12 7%
Psychology 4 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 79 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,506,078
of 23,530,272 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#394
of 3,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,053
of 424,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#10
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,530,272 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,489 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 424,581 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.