↓ Skip to main content

Creating Effective Learning in Today's Emergency Departments: How Accomplished Teachers Get It Done

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Emergency Medicine, March 2005
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 (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
Creating Effective Learning in Today's Emergency Departments: How Accomplished Teachers Get It Done
Published in
Annals of Emergency Medicine, March 2005
DOI 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.08.007
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Significant impediments to effective emergency department (ED) teaching compromise what could otherwise be an excellent learning milieu. There is little literature to guide faculty development around specific emergency medicine teaching techniques. We determine what recognized experts in emergency medicine teaching consider to be the important clinical teaching behaviors that make them good teachers, the main impediments to good teaching in EDs, and important prerequisites for a good ED teacher.

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 12 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 105 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 %
United States 3 3%
Mexico 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 99 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 14 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Master 6 6%
Other 24 23%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 62%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Engineering 2 2%
Mathematics 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 27 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,606,506
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#2,405
of 8,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,933
of 107,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#12
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. 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 107,921 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 60% of its contemporaries.