| Title |
Determinants of research engagement in academic obstetrics and gynaecology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-016-0640-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ariadna Fernandez, Leslie Sadownik, Sarka Lisonkova, Geoffrey Cundiff, K. S. Joseph |
| Abstract |
To identify the determinants of research engagement among faculty in an academic department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. All members of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of British Columbia were mailed an online version of the Edmonton Research Orientation Survey (EROS) in 2011 and in 2014. High scores on overall research engagement and on each of the 4 subscales, namely, value of research, value of innovation, research involvement and research utilization/evidence-based practice were quantified. Analyses were carried out on both surveys combined and on the 2014 survey separately. Logistic regression was used to identify determinants of high levels of research engagement. The overall response rate was 37 % (130 responses; 54 respondents in 2011 and 76 respondents in 2014). The average EROS score was 140 (range 54 to 184) and 35 % of respondents had a score ≥150. Significant determinants of positive research engagement based on the overall EROS scale included being paid for research work (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 22.1, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.47-197.7) and carrying out research during unpaid hours (AOR 6.41, 95 % CI 1.97-20.9). Age <50 years (AOR 11.0, 95 % CI 1.35-89.9) and clinical experience <20 years (AOR 19.7, 95 % CI 2.18-178.8) were positively associated, while journal reading during unpaid hours (AOR 0.21, 95 % CI 0.07-0.62) was negatively associated with specific EROS subscales. In a setting with a positive research orientation, research engagement among the faculty was associated with paid research time, research work and journal reading during unpaid hours and more recent entry into clinical practice. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 15% |
| Psychology | 4 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
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 30 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,797,589
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,600
of 3,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,610
of 269,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#59
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 269,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 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.