| Title |
Work Related Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in Medicine Residents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Academic Psychiatry, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40596-018-0911-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lakshmi Kannan, David S. Wheeler, Scott Blumhof, Jonathan Gotfried, Allison Ferris, Ajita Mathur, Elizabeth Hembree, Darilyn Moyer, Janani Rangaswami |
| Abstract |
This study sought to screen for the burden of work-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms in internal medicine residents. A cross-sectional survey of internal medicine residents from three academic institutions was conducted using the PCL-5 screening tool. Off all residents surveyed, 5.2% screened positive for PTSD symptoms (N = 194). 86.1% of all trainees identified stressors during training. Positive PTSD screens were significantly higher in PGY3 residents (X2 = 15.24, p = 0.0005). Of all PGY3 residents, 9.8% (N = 4) and 14.6% (N = 6) of residents screened positive for PTSD symptoms based on absolute and cluster score criteria, respectively. Verbal/physical assault by patients/families/colleagues were triggers for the most cases of positive screens. Self-reported stressors are highly prevalent in internal medicine trainees. Verbal/physical assault by patients and families appear to be the triggering event for most positive screens. These observations will help with future study designs to quantify the burden of work related PTSD in internal medicine trainee physicians so that appropriate supportive measures can be provided. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 States | 2 | 29% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 12 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 27% |
| Psychology | 4 | 13% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 14 | 47% |
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 06 September 2019.
All research outputs
#6,970,675
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from Academic Psychiatry
#377
of 1,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,986
of 329,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Psychiatry
#15
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 329,898 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.