↓ Skip to main content

Strengthening medical training programmes by focusing on professional transitions: a national bridging programme to prepare medical school graduates for their role as medical interns in Botswana

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
Title
Strengthening medical training programmes by focusing on professional transitions: a national bridging programme to prepare medical school graduates for their role as medical interns in Botswana
Published in
BMC Medical Education, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-1102-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J. Peluso, Rebecca Luckett, Savara Mantzor, Alemayhu G. Bedada, Paul Saleeb, Miriam Haverkamp, Mosepele Mosepele, Cecil Haverkamp, Rosa Maoto, Detlef Prozesky, Neo Tapela, Oathokwa Nkomazana, Tomer Barak

Abstract

The improvement of existing medical training programmes in resource-constrained settings is seen as key to addressing the challenge of retaining medical graduates trained at considerable cost both in-country and abroad. In Botswana, the establishment of the national Medical Internship Training Programme (MIT) in 2014 was a first step in efforts to promote retention through the expansion and standardization of internship training, but MIT faces a major challenge related to variability between incoming trainees due to factors such as their completion of undergraduate medical training in different settings. To address this challenge, in August 2016 we piloted a bridging programme for foreign and locally trained medical graduates that aimed to facilitate their transition into internship training. This study aimed to describe the programme and evaluate its impact on the participants' self-rated perceptions of their knowledge, experience, clinical skills, and familiarity with Botswana's healthcare system. We conducted a national, intensive, two-week programme designed to facilitate the transition from medical student to intern and to prepare all incoming interns for their work in Botswana's health system. Participants included all interns entering in August 2016. Formats included lectures, workshops, simulations, discussions, and reflection-oriented activities. The Kellogg Foundation Outcomes Logic Model was used to evaluate the programme, and participants self-rated their knowledge, skills, and attitudes across each of the programme objectives on paired questionnaires before and after participation. 48/54 participants (89%) provided paired data. Participants reported a high degree of satisfaction with the programme (mean 4.2/5). Self-rated preparedness improved after participation (mean 3.2 versus 3.7, p < 0.001), as did confidence across 18/19 knowledge/skill domains, suggesting that participants felt that the programme prepared them for their internship training. Exploratory analysis revealed that 20/25 participants (80%) reporting either no effect or a negative effect following participation had rated themselves "extremely" or "quite" prepared beforehand, suggesting the programme grounded expectations for interns who initially were overconfident. In contrast, no interns who had initially rated themselves "moderately" or "somewhat" prepared reported a decline in their self-rated sense of preparedness. Interns commented on the benefits of learning about roles/responsibilities, interacting with clinicians from Botswana's healthcare sectors, and the sense of community the programme engendered. This programme was feasible to implement and was well-received by participants. Overall, participants perceived an enhancement of their knowledge, skills, and expectations about their role in Botswana's health system after completion of the programme. Our results are likely to be of interest to educators dedicated to training, professional transitions, and career pathways in similar settings in the region and beyond.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 10 10%
Lecturer 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 26 26%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Social Sciences 11 11%
Psychology 4 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 27 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,485,357
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,342
of 3,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,271
of 440,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#52
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 440,658 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.