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 |
Analysing clinical reasoning characteristics using a combined methods approach
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Education, October 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-13-144 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Michele Groves, Marie-Louise Dick, Geoff McColl, Justin Bilszta |
Abstract |
Despite a major research focus on clinical reasoning over the last several decades, a method of evaluating the clinical reasoning process that is both objective and comprehensive is yet to be developed.The aim of this study was to test whether a dual approach, using two measures of clinical reasoning, the Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP) and the Script Concordance Test (SCT), provides a valid, reliable and targeted analysis of clinical reasoning characteristics to facilitate the development of diagnostic thinking in medical students. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
Spain | 1 | 33% |
Malta | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 2% |
United States | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 58 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
Lecturer | 7 | 11% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
Researcher | 5 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
Other | 20 | 33% |
Unknown | 10 | 16% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 57% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
Psychology | 2 | 3% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 7% |
Unknown | 10 | 16% |
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 08 November 2013.
All research outputs
#14,181,583
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,952
of 3,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,020
of 212,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#20
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 212,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.