↓ Skip to main content

Training Strategies for Laboratory Animal Veterinarians: Challenges and Opportunities

Overview of attention for article published in ILAR Journal, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
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
Training Strategies for Laboratory Animal Veterinarians: Challenges and Opportunities
Published in
ILAR Journal, January 2007
DOI 10.1093/ilar.48.2.143
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lesley A Colby, Patricia V Turner, Mary Ann Vasbinder

Abstract

The field of laboratory animal medicine is experiencing a serious shortage of appropriately trained veterinarians for both clinically related and research-oriented positions within academia, industry, and government. Recent outreach efforts sponsored by professional organizations have stimulated increased interest in the field. It is an opportune time to critically review and evaluate postgraduate training opportunities in the United States and Canada, including formal training programs, informal training, publicly accessible training resources and educational opportunities, and newly emerging training resources such as Internet-based learning aids. Challenges related to each of these training opportunities exist and include increasing enrollment in formal programs, securing adequate funding support, ensuring appropriate content between formal programs that may have diverse objectives, and accommodating the training needs of veterinarians who enter the field by the experience route. Current training opportunities and resources that exist for veterinarians who enter and are established within the field of laboratory animal science are examined. Strategies for improving formal laboratory animal medicine training programs and for developing alternative programs more suited to practicing clinical veterinarians are discussed. In addition, the resources for high-quality continuing education of experienced laboratory animal veterinarians are reviewed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 4%
Belgium 1 4%
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 21 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Researcher 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 29%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2011.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from ILAR Journal
#251
of 518 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,195
of 168,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ILAR Journal
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 518 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 168,338 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.