| Title |
Orthopedic Oncology Caseload Among Orthopedic Surgery Residents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-016-1080-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard M. Hinds, Timothy B. Rapp, John T. Capo |
| Abstract |
Despite educational focus regarding orthopedic oncology during residency, assessment of resident orthopedic oncology caseload has not been performed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate orthopedic oncology caseload trends and variation among residents. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education case log reports for orthopedic surgery residents were reviewed for graduating years 2007 to 2013. Trends in orthopedic oncology cases and variation in the median number of cases performed by residents in the 90th, 50th, and 10th percentiles of caseload were evaluated. The proportion of orthopedic oncology caseload among all cases performed by residents increased significantly (P = 0.005) from 2007 to 2013. Likewise, the mean number of adult (P = 0.002), pediatric (P = 0.003), and total orthopedic oncology cases increased significantly (P = 0.002). On average, residents in the 90th, 50th, and 10th percentiles performed 83, 28, and 3 cases, respectively. The current study demonstrates a significant increase in adult, pediatric, and total orthopedic oncology caseload. There is also evidence of substantial caseload variation among residents. Caseload variation may influence the education and technical proficiency of orthopedic residents. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 12% |
| Librarian | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 29% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 41% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
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 18 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,603,172
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#808
of 1,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,564
of 364,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#18
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,151 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 364,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.