| Title |
Paediatric departments need to improve residents’ training in adolescent medicine and health: a position paper of the European Academy of Paediatrics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Pediatrics, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00431-017-3061-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pierre-André Michaud, Lenneke Schrier, Robert Ross-Russel, Laila van der Heijden, Lien Dossche, Sian Copley, Tommaso Alterio, Artur Mazur, Lukasz Dembinski, Adamos Hadjipanayis, Stefano del Torso, Helena Fonseca, Anne-Emmanuelle Ambresin |
| Abstract |
In many European countries, paediatric junior staff has no formal training in adolescent medicine and is ill-equipped to deal with issues and health problems such as substance use, unprotected sex, eating disorders and transition to adult care. This position paper of the European Academy of Paediatrics proposes a set of competency-based training goals and objectives as well as pedagogic approaches that are expected to improve the capacity of paediatricians to meet the needs of this important segment of the paediatric population. The content has been developed from available publications and training programmes and mostly covers the generic aspects of adolescent healthcare, such as how to communicate effectively, how to review and address lifestyles, how to perform a respectful and relevant physical examination, how to address common problems of adolescents and how to support adolescents in coping with a chronic condition. The European Academy of Paediatrics urges national bodies, paediatric associations and paediatric teaching departments to adopt these training objectives and put them into practice, so that paediatricians will be better prepared in the future to meet the challenge of delivering appropriate and effective healthcare to adolescents. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 20% |
| Belgium | 1 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Librarian | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 24% |
| Unknown | 19 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 15% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#3,703,790
of 25,390,970 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#636
of 4,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,027
of 454,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#13
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,970 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 454,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.