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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Enhanced research assessment performance in graduate vs. undergraduate-entry medical students: implications for recruitment into academic medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1093/qjmed/hcu064 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E.M. Duggan, C.M.P. O’Tuathaigh, M. Horgan, S. O’Flynn |
| Abstract |
Studies investigating variance between the academic performance of direct-entry (DEM) versus graduate-entry (GEM) medical students have yielded conflicting results, but their performance in undergraduate research-based assessments has not been compared to-date. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Design | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 03 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,064,611
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from QJM: An International Journal of Medicine
#1,401
of 2,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,304
of 238,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from QJM: An International Journal of Medicine
#10
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 238,073 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 25 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 60% of its contemporaries.