↓ Skip to main content

Patient participation in general practice based undergraduate teaching: a focus group study of patient perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Patient participation in general practice based undergraduate teaching: a focus group study of patient perspectives
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, March 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x690233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophie E Park, Caroline Allfrey, Melvyn M Jones, Jasprit Chana, Ciara Abbott, Sofia Faircloth, Nicola Higgins, Laila Abdullah

Abstract

Patients make a crucial contribution to undergraduate medical education. Although a national resource is available for patients participating in research, none is as yet available for education. This study aimed to explore what information patients would like about participation in general practice based undergraduate medical education, and how they would like to obtain this information. Two focus groups were conducted in London-based practices involved in both undergraduate and postgraduate teaching. Patients both with and without teaching experience were recruited using leaflets, posters, and patient participation groups. An open-ended topic guide explored three areas: perceived barriers that participants anticipated or had experienced; patient roles in medical education; and what help would support participation. Focus groups were audiorecorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Patients suggested ways of professionalising the teaching process. These were: making information available to patients about confidentiality, iterative consent, and normalising teaching in the practice. Patients highlighted the importance of relationships, making information available about their GPs' involvement in teaching, and initiating student-patient interactions. Participants emphasised educational principles to maximise exchange of information, including active participation of students, patient identification of student learner needs, and exchange of feedback. This study will inform development of patient information resources to support their participation in teaching and access to information both before and during general practice based teaching encounters.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Other 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 11 24%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Computer Science 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,480,611
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#4,151
of 4,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,434
of 309,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#94
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 309,067 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.