| Title |
Handoff Practices in Undergraduate Medical Education
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-014-2806-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Beth W. Liston, Kimberly M. Tartaglia, Daniel Evans, Curt Walker, Dario Torre |
| Abstract |
Growing data demonstrate that inaccuracies are prevalent in current handoff practices, and that these inaccuracies contribute to medical errors. In response, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) now requires residency programs to monitor and assess resident competence in handoff communication. Given these changes, undergraduate medical education programs must adapt to these patient safety concerns. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Mexico | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 May 2014.
All research outputs
#6,682,586
of 24,037,100 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,703
of 7,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,792
of 228,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#39
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,037,100 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,836 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 228,705 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 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 65% of its contemporaries.