↓ Skip to main content

Step Up—Not On—The Step 2 Clinical Skills Exam

Overview of attention for article published in Academic medicine, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Step Up—Not On—The Step 2 Clinical Skills Exam
Published in
Academic medicine, May 2018
DOI 10.1097/acm.0000000000001874
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Recently, a student-initiated movement to end the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills and the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination Level 2-Performance Evaluation has gained momentum. These are the only national licensing examinations designed to assess clinical skills competence in the stepwise process through which physicians gain licensure and certification. Therefore, the movement to end these examinations and the ensuing debate merit careful consideration. The authors, elected representatives of the Directors of Clinical Skills Courses, an organization comprising clinical skills educators in the United States and beyond, believe abolishing the national clinical skills examinations would have a major negative impact on the clinical skills training of medical students, and that forfeiting a national clinical skills competency standard has the potential to diminish the quality of care provided to patients. In this Perspective, the authors offer important additional background information, outline key concerns regarding the consequences of ending these national clinical skills examinations, and provide recommendations for moving forward: reducing the costs for students, exploring alternatives, increasing the value and transparency of the current examinations, recognizing and enhancing the strengths of the current examinations, and engaging in a national dialogue about the issue.

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 17 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 24 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 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 17%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 8 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Mathematics 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 18 November 2018.
All research outputs
#5,877,286
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Academic medicine
#2,204
of 7,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,344
of 370,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic medicine
#58
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,704 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 370,670 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 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 51% of its contemporaries.