| Title |
Validating e-learning in continuing pharmacy education: user acceptance and knowledge change
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-14-33 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Krzysztof Nesterowicz, Tadeusz Librowski, Samuel Edelbring |
| Abstract |
Continuing pharmacy education is becoming mandatory in most countries in order to keep the professional license valid. Increasing number of pharmacists are now using e-learning as part of their continuing education. Consequently, the increasing popularity of this method of education calls for standardization and validation practices. The conducted research explored validation aspects of e-learning in terms of knowledge increase and user acceptance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Estonia | 1 | 1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 97 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 22% |
| Unknown | 23 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 26% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 February 2014.
All research outputs
#15,867,545
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,364
of 3,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,445
of 340,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#42
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,504 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 340,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.