↓ Skip to main content

Interprofessional and online learning

Overview of attention for article published in Nursing & Health Sciences, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 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
Interprofessional and online learning
Published in
Nursing & Health Sciences, January 2014
DOI 10.1111/nhs.12105
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa McKenna, Malcolm Boyle, Claire Palermo, Elizabeth Molloy, Brett Williams, Ted Brown

Abstract

Interprofessional education is increasingly a core component of health professional curricula. It has been suggested that interprofessional education can directly enhance patient care outcomes. However, literature has reported many difficulties in its successful implementation. This study investigated students' perceptions of participating in an online, Web-based module to facilitate interprofessional education. Three focus groups, each with 13-15 students, from emergency health (paramedic), nursing, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and nutrition and dietetics were conducted with students who participated in an online interprofessional education module at one Australian university. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze interview transcripts. Four themes emerged: professional understanding, patient-centeredness, comparison with other interprofessional education activities, and overcoming geographical boundaries. Students were overwhelmingly positive about their learning experiences and the value of the module in assisting their understandings of the roles of other health professionals. Online approaches to interprofessional education have the potential to enhance learning and overcome geographical and logistical issues inherent in delivering face-to-face interprofessional education. Furthermore, our design approach allowed students to watch how other health professionals worked in a way that they were unable to achieve in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 153 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Professor 8 5%
Other 34 22%
Unknown 38 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 40 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 20%
Social Sciences 15 10%
Psychology 10 6%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 43 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 November 2015.
All research outputs
#16,063,069
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Nursing & Health Sciences
#298
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,205
of 320,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nursing & Health Sciences
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. 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 320,833 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.