| Title |
Co-operative Networks and their Influence on Engagement: A Study with Students of a Degree in Nursing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Systems, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10916-017-0747-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pilar Marqués-Sánchez, Javier Alfonso-Cendón, Mª Elena Fernández-Martínez, Arrate Pinto-Carral, Cristina Liébana-Presa, Miguel Ángel Conde, Francisco José García-Peñalvo |
| Abstract |
At present, the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) emphasizes the importance of collaborative learning in University education. Previous studies have found evidence to support collaborative activities; however, none have analyzed the influence of contact networks among students on their engagement and performance. This paper reports an intervention with nursing degree students aimed at facilitating an interdependent network to promote engagement and improve academic performance. The intervention was based on recording a video during a case study. The variables analyzed were network centrality, engagement and performance. The UCINET program was used to analyse social networks. The results showed a more cohesive network after the intervention and a high level of academic performance. The use of contact networks among students could be used as an academic strategy to build bridges between students in the classroom and even between these and students in other classrooms or centres. |
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 | 2 | 40% |
| Spain | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 8 | 14% |
| Professor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 27 | 46% |
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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,337,901
of 24,958,301 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#538
of 1,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,742
of 319,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#6
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,958,301 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 1,244 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 319,155 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 22 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 72% of its contemporaries.