| Title |
Assessing the Effectiveness of a Grand Rounds CME Activity for Health-Care Professionals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-013-0507-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Terry Ann Glauser, P. Holder Nevins, J. Chad Williamson, Brian Tomlinson |
| Abstract |
The Lymphoma Research Foundation offers Grand Rounds continuing medical education (CME) activities on specific issues related to advances in the management of patients with lymphoma. The 2012 activity comprised interactive case studies presented by local lymphoma experts. A case-based survey was designed to assess whether the management choices of program participants are consistent with the evidence-based content of the CME activity. This survey was administered to participants 1 month after completion of the CME activity and also to a control group who did not participate in the educational program. Participants were more aware of the epidemiology of CD20-positive tumors than were controls and were more likely to appropriately diagnose primary mediastinal large B cell lymphoma (PMBCL), use evidence-based second-line therapy for PMBCL, and properly manage a patient with classic Hodgkin lymphoma that did not respond to standard therapy. Participants were also more confident than controls in their ability to interpret histology and cytogenetic testing for selecting an optimal treatment. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 24% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 44% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2013.
All research outputs
#14,171,982
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#504
of 1,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,709
of 196,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,126 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 196,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 64% of its contemporaries.