↓ Skip to main content

Developing a peer review process for web-based curricula

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
15 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.
Article details
Title
Developing a peer review process for web-based curricula
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2004
DOI 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30218.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The World Wide Web creates new challenges and opportunities for medical educators. Prominent among these are the lack of consistent standards by which to evaluate web-based educational tools. We present the instrument that was used to review web-based innovations in medical education submissions to the 2003 Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) national meeting, and discuss the process used by the SGIM web-based clinical curriculum interest group to develop the instrument. The 5 highest-ranked submissions are summarized with commentary from the reviewers.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 20%
Librarian 2 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 May 2013.
All research outputs
#19,440,618
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6,622
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,606
of 59,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#29
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 59,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.