| Title |
Different perceptions of narrative medicine between Western and Chinese medicine students
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-017-0925-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chien-Da Huang, Kuo-Chen Liao, Fu-Tsai Chung, Hsu-Min Tseng, Ji-Tseng Fang, Shu-Chung Lii, Han-Pin Kuo, San-Jou Yeh, Shih-Tseng Lee |
| Abstract |
Western medicine is an evidence-based science, whereas Chinese medicine is more of a healing art. To date, there has been no research that has examined whether students of Western and Chinese medicine differentially engage in, or benefit from, educational activities for narrative medicine. This study fills a gap in current literature with the aim of evaluating and comparing Western and Chinese Medicine students' perceptions of narrative medicine as an approach to learning empathy and professionalism. An initial 10-item questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale was developed to assess fifth-year Western medical (MS) and traditional Chinese medical (TCMS) students' perceptions of a 4-activity narrative medicine program during a 13-week internal medicine clerkship. Exploratory factor analysis was undertaken. The response rate was 88.6% (412/465), including 270 (65.5%) MSs and 142 (34.5%) TCMSs, with a large reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.934). Three factors were extracted from 9 items: personal attitude, self-development/reflection, and emotional benefit, more favorable in terms of enhancement of self-development/reflection. The perceptions of narrative medicine by scores between the two groups were significantly higher in TCMSs than MSs in all 9-item questionnaire and 3 extracted factors. Given the different learning cultures of medical education in which these student groups engage, this suggests that undertaking a course in Chinese medicine might enhance one's acceptance to, and benefit from, a medical humanities course. Alternatively, Chinese medicine programmes might attract more humanities-focused students. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brunei Darussalam | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 105 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 9% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 35 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Psychology | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 38 | 36% |
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 12 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,718,944
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,796
of 4,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,878
of 325,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#16
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,023 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 325,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 60% of its contemporaries.