| Title |
The Impact of a Radiation Oncologist led Oncology Curriculum on Medical Student Knowledge
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-017-1227-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ankit Agarwal, Aishwarya Shah, Bhartesh Shah, Brian Koottappillil, Ariel E. Hirsch |
| Abstract |
Medical students at our institution all take a pre-clinical oncology course as well as a clinical radiation oncology didactic session during their clinical curriculum. The objective of this analysis is to demonstrate the impact of the radiation oncology didactic on medical student knowledge of core oncology concepts. All students received a standardized didactic lecture introducing students to core concepts of general oncology and radiation. We administered an 18-question pretest and a posttest examining student knowledge between 2012 and 2015. Changes in student responses between pre-test and post-tests were analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of the didactic session. Over the course of three years, 319 (64.4%) of 495 students who completed the Radiology block completed both the pre-test and post-test. The average student test grade improved from 62.0% on the pretest to 69.6% on the posttest (p < 0.001). By category, students increased their score from 81.4% to 89.8% (p < 0.001) in general oncology, from 59.9% to 69.9% (p < 0.001) in breast oncology, from 43.0% to 51.0% (p < 0.001) in prostate oncology, and from 71.3% to 75.7% (p = 0.003) in radiation oncology. Students showed increases in knowledge across general oncology, prostate oncology, breast oncology, and radiation oncology. |
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 States | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 27% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
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 18 October 2019.
All research outputs
#14,345,967
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#525
of 1,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,693
of 310,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 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 1,152 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 310,718 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 19 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 52% of its contemporaries.