| Title |
Educational games for health professionals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006411.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elie A Akl, Victor F Kairouz, Kay M Sackett, William S Erdley, Reem A Mustafa, Michelle Fiander, Carolynne Gabriel, Holger Schünemann |
| Abstract |
The use of games as an educational strategy has the potential to improve health professionals' performance (e.g. adherence to standards of care) through improving their knowledge, skills and attitudes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 | 3 | 23% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 15% |
| Ireland | 1 | 8% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| Korea, Democratic People's Republic of | 1 | 8% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 46% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 520 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iceland | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 508 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 101 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 48 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 9% |
| Researcher | 43 | 8% |
| Other | 28 | 5% |
| Other | 105 | 20% |
| Unknown | 150 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 141 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 64 | 12% |
| Psychology | 31 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 27 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 24 | 5% |
| Other | 62 | 12% |
| Unknown | 171 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,147,610
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,477
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,237
of 210,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#69
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 210,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.