The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education recommends the structured portfolio as a preferred assessment tool for assessing all six of its core physician competencies. However, compared with other evaluation measures, it may be one of the most resource-intensive for learners and evaluators. Given the time and effort needed to properly develop mentors, train evaluators, and persuade learners, facilitation of the learning environment supporting a portfolio may be the most important variable determining its success or failure. The authors review the components necessary to successfully build and maintain a robust portfolio learning environment in a graduate medical education setting. These include gaining staff acceptance, staging implementation, enhancing learner participation, training mentors, choosing paper versus electronic formats, and selecting assessment methods. Their blueprint for implementing a portfolio is informed by their five-year experience with a portfolio rollout in one internal medicine residency, from 2006 to 2011.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 March 2012.
All research outputs
#12,425,654
of 34,518,147 outputs
Outputs from Academic medicine
#4,060
of 7,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,938
of 306,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic medicine
#34
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,518,147 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 306,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
