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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Introducing the individual Teamwork Observation and Feedback Tool (iTOFT): Development and description of a new interprofessional teamwork measure
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Interprofessional Care, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3109/13561820.2016.1169262 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jill Thistlethwaite, Kathy Dallest, Monica Moran, Roger Dunston, Chris Roberts, Diann Eley, Fiona Bogossian, Dawn Forman, Lesley Bainbridge, Donna Drynan, Sue Fyfe |
| Abstract |
The individual Teamwork Observation and Feedback Tool (iTOFT) was devised by a consortium of seven universities in recognition of the need for a means of observing and giving feedback to individual learners undertaking an interprofessional teamwork task. It was developed through a literature review of the existing teamwork assessment tools, a discussion of accreditation standards for the health professions, Delphi consultation and field-testing with an emphasis on its feasibility and acceptability for formative assessment. There are two versions: the Basic tool is for use with students who have little clinical teamwork experience and lists 11 observable behaviours under two headings: 'shared decision making' and 'working in a team'. The Advanced version is for senior students and junior health professionals and has 10 observable behaviours under four headings: 'shared decision making', 'working in a team', 'leadership', and 'patient safety'. Both versions include a comprehensive scale and item descriptors. Further testing is required to focus on its validity and educational impact. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 109 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 32 | 29% |
| Unknown | 26 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 12% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 30 | 28% |
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 28 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,377,214
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#880
of 1,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,712
of 340,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#28
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 340,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.