| Title |
Does clinical teacher training always improve teaching effectiveness as opposed to no teacher training? A randomized controlled study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-14-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Breckwoldt, Jörg Svensson, Christian Lingemann, Hans Gruber |
| Abstract |
Teacher training may improve teaching effectiveness, but it might also have paradoxical effects. Research on expertise development suggests that the integration of new strategies may result in a temporary deterioration of performance until higher levels of competence are reached. In this study, the impact of a clinical teacher training on teaching effectiveness was assessed in an intensive course in emergency medicine. As primary study outcome students' practical skills at the end of their course were chosen. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 18% |
| Researcher | 18 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 39 | 30% |
| Unknown | 20 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 37% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 13% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 December 2016.
All research outputs
#6,934,754
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,213
of 3,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,938
of 304,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#18
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,301 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 304,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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.