↓ Skip to main content

Toward an Informal Curriculum that Teaches Professionalism

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Toward an Informal Curriculum that Teaches Professionalism
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2004
DOI 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30157.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony L. Suchman, Penelope R. Williamson, Debra K. Litzelman, Richard M. Frankel, David L. Mossbarger, Thomas S. Inui, the Relationship‐centered Care Initiative Discovery Team

Abstract

The social environment or "informal" curriculum of a medical school profoundly influences students' values and professional identities. The Indiana University School of Medicine is seeking to foster a social environment that consistently embodies and reinforces the values of its formal competency-based curriculum. Using an appreciative narrative-based approach, we have been encouraging students, residents, and faculty to be more mindful of relationship dynamics throughout the school. As participants discover how much relational capacity already exists and how widespread is the desire for a more collaborative environment, their perceptions of the school seem to shift, evoking behavior change and hopeful expectations for the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 81 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Other 10 12%
Researcher 10 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Other 25 29%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 41%
Social Sciences 18 21%
Psychology 6 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 12 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 27 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,846,683
of 25,402,889 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,405
of 8,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,412
of 62,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 62,060 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.