| Title |
The Massive Online Needs Assessment (MONA) to inform the development of an emergency haematology educational blog series
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40037-018-0406-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Teresa M. Chan, David Jo, Andrew W. Shih, Vinai C. Bhagirath, Lana A. Castellucci, Calvin Yeh, Brent Thoma, Eric K. Tseng, Kerstin de Wit |
| Abstract |
Online educational resources are criticized as being teacher-centred, failing to address learner's needs. Needs assessments are an important precursor to inform curriculum development, but these are often overlooked or skipped by developers of online educational resources due to cumbersome measurement tools. Novel methods are required to identify perceived and unperceived learning needs to allow targeted development of learner-centred curricula. To evaluate the feasibility of performing a novel technique dubbed the Massive Online Needs Assessment (MONA) for the purpose of emergency haematology online educational curricular planning, within an online learning community (affiliated with the Free Open Access Medical education movement). An online survey was launched on CanadiEM.org using an embedded Google Forms survey. Participants were recruited using the study website and a social media campaign (utilizing Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, and a poster) targeting a specific online community. Web analytics were used to monitor participation rates in addition to survey responses. The survey was open from 20 September to 10 December 2016 and received 198 complete responses representing 6 medical specialties from 21 countries. Most survey respondents identified themselves as staff physicians (n = 109) and medical trainees (n = 75). We identified 17 high-priority perceived needs, 17 prompted needs, and 10 topics with unperceived needs through our MONA process. A MONA is a feasible, novel method for collecting data on perceived, prompted, and unperceived learning needs to inform an online emergency haematology educational blog. This methodology could be useful to the developers of other online education resources. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 9 | 43% |
| United States | 3 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 52% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 38% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 26 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 26 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#1,971,869
of 25,443,857 outputs
Outputs from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#94
of 574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,682
of 343,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tijdschrift voor Medisch Onderwijs
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,443,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 343,691 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.