↓ Skip to main content

What supervisors and universities can do to enhance doctoral student experience (and how they can help themselves)

Overview of attention for article published in FEMS Microbiology Letters, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
What supervisors and universities can do to enhance doctoral student experience (and how they can help themselves)
Published in
FEMS Microbiology Letters, May 2017
DOI 10.1093/femsle/fnx090
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Over the past two decades, there has been a flurry of government papers and policy reports worldwide calling for increased number and diversity of doctoral researchers and a broadening of the curriculum to meet the developing needs of respective national 'knowledge-driven' economies. This has been followed by position papers and best practice examples of employability skills development in boundary-crossing doctoral programmes, especially in response to these initiatives. However, there is a disassociation between this ample literature expounding the new doctorate with its broader remit, inclusivity and production of 'industry-ready' graduates, and the comparatively sparse literature on the doctoral candidates' experiences of their programmes and career readiness. Within this review, we briefly outline international government initiatives and examples of the responses by Life Science and Biomedical doctoral programmes to address these various challenges. Further, we explore the recent literature on the lived experience of doctoral researchers by examining their perception of the recent changes to the research context to make recommendations for universities and supervisors on how to better support an ever more diverse doctoral population for a wide range of career opportunities. Examples of how doctoral researchers themselves can make the best of currently available opportunities are also provided.

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 profiles of 4 X users 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 132 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 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 16%
Lecturer 12 9%
Student > Master 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Researcher 9 7%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 44 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Arts and Humanities 5 4%
Other 32 24%
Unknown 51 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#9,148,834
of 27,788,362 outputs
Outputs from FEMS Microbiology Letters
#1,819
of 5,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,991
of 331,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from FEMS Microbiology Letters
#14
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,788,362 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,995 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 331,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 69% of its contemporaries.