↓ Skip to main content

What students really learn: contrasting medical and nursing students’ experiences of the clinical learning environment

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, October 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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
Title
What students really learn: contrasting medical and nursing students’ experiences of the clinical learning environment
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10459-014-9564-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matilda Liljedahl, Lena Engqvist Boman, Charlotte Porthén Fält, Klara Bolander Laksov

Abstract

This paper explores and contrasts undergraduate medical and nursing students' experiences of the clinical learning environment. Using a sociocultural perspective of learning and an interpretative approach, 15 in-depth interviews with medical and nursing students were analysed with content analysis. Students' experiences are described using a framework of 'before', 'during' and 'after' clinical placements. Three major themes emerged from the analysis, contrasting the medical and nursing students' experiences of the clinical learning environment: (1) expectations of the placement; (2) relationship with the supervisor; and (3) focus of learning. The findings offer an increased understanding of how medical and nursing students learn in the clinical setting; they also show that the clinical learning environment contributes to the socialisation process of students not only into their future profession, but also into their role as learners. Differences between the two professions should be taken into consideration when designing interprofessional learning activities. Also, the findings can be used as a tool for clinical supervisors in the reflection on how student learning in the clinical learning environment can be improved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 146 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Researcher 12 8%
Lecturer 12 8%
Other 43 29%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 26%
Social Sciences 17 11%
Psychology 4 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 29 20%
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 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,415,092
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#534
of 851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,327
of 255,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#13
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 255,838 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.