↓ Skip to main content

Changing the Culture of Academic Medicine

Overview of attention for article published in Academic medicine, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

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.
Article details
Title
Changing the Culture of Academic Medicine
Published in
Academic medicine, September 2013
DOI 10.1097/acm.0b013e31829e84e0
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The culture of academic medicine has been described as hierarchical, competitive, and not highly supportive of female or minority faculty. In response to this, the authors designed the Learning Action Network (LAN), which was part of the National Initiative on Gender, Culture and Leadership in Medicine (C-Change). The LAN is a five-school consortium aimed at changing the organizational culture of its constituent institutions. The authors selected LAN schools to be geographically diverse and representative of U.S. medical schools. Institutional leaders and faculty representatives from constituent schools met twice yearly for four years (2006-2010), forming a cross-institutional learning community. Through their quarterly listing of institutional activities, schools reported a wide array of actions. Most common were increased faculty development and/or mentoring, new approaches to communication, and adoption of new policies and procedures. Other categories included data collection/management, engagement of key stakeholders, education regarding gender/diversity, and new/expanded leadership positions. Through exit interviews, most participants reported feeling optimistic about maintaining the momentum of change. However, some, especially in schools with leadership changes, expressed uncertainty. Participants reported that they felt that the LAN enabled, empowered, facilitated, and/or caused the reported actions.For others who might want to work toward changing the culture of academic medicine, the authors offer several lessons learned from their experiences with C-Change. Most notably, people, structures, policies, and reward systems must be put into place to support cultural values, and broad-based support should be created in order for changes to persist when inevitable transitions in leadership occur.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 83 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Student > Master 12 14%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 25 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 25%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Psychology 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 26 31%
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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#10,711,705
of 34,362,729 outputs
Outputs from Academic medicine
#3,617
of 7,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,463
of 246,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic medicine
#39
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,362,729 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 52% 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 246,001 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 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 54% of its contemporaries.