↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of multidisciplinary strategies and traditional approaches in teaching pathology in medical students

Overview of attention for article published in Pathology International, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of multidisciplinary strategies and traditional approaches in teaching pathology in medical students
Published in
Pathology International, July 2018
DOI 10.1111/pin.12706
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vinod Gopalan, Kais Kasem, Suja Pillai, David Olveda, Armin Ariana, Melissa Leung, Alfred K.Y. Lam

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the impact on the implementation of multiple strategies to improve medical student's pathology learning experience. In two consecutive years, medical students after a whole year of enrolling in pathology teaching, were invited to complete questionnaires rating and commenting on the personal learning experience of multiple teaching resources delivered in pathology. In both years, the overall score was high (mean score = 4.57 ± 0.63 /5) for the newly introduced sessions, namely histology lectures, clinical integrations and virtual microscopy pre-practical sessions. However, this was only marginally different from that of traditional practical (mean = 4.37 ± 0.68/5) and pathology lecture sessions (mean = 4.42 ± 0.61 /5). In addition, 53% positive correlation was noted for the overall responses between virtual microscopy guided pathology modules and practical sessions indicating the benefit of virtual microscopy in better preparing students for these sessions (P < 0.001). Qualitative comments suggested that the virtual microscopy sessions along with clinical scenario based learning were extremely useful for students' learning in pathology. To conclude, a multidisciplinary approach by clinical integration and flexibility in the mode of delivery by the use of virtual microscopy has the potential to better engage students to the learning of pathology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 8%
Lecturer 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 9 25%
Unknown 14 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Engineering 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,581,567
of 24,464,848 outputs
Outputs from Pathology International
#392
of 839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,500
of 334,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pathology International
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,464,848 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 839 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 334,262 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them