↓ Skip to main content

Measurement of the Postgraduate Educational Environment of Junior Doctors Training in Medicine at an Irish University Teaching Hospital

Overview of attention for article published in Irish Journal of Medical Science, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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.
Title
Measurement of the Postgraduate Educational Environment of Junior Doctors Training in Medicine at an Irish University Teaching Hospital
Published in
Irish Journal of Medical Science, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11845-015-1303-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. T. Flaherty, R. Connolly, T. O’Brien

Abstract

A positive learning environment in which postgraduate doctors are supported, supervised and nurtured, is likely to lead to enhanced professional satisfaction and improved patient care. The aims of the current study were to use the PHEEM inventory to determine the aspects of their current learning environment which junior doctors rate most and least positively. The PHEEM questionnaire was administered to all junior doctors working in medical subspecialties at Galway University Hospitals in Ireland. A response rate of 60 % (n = 61) was obtained. The mean total PHEEM score was 82.88 ± 18.99, corresponding to an educational environment with more positive than negative aspects but with room for improvement. The mean total PHEEM score (±standard deviation) of registrars (89.65 ± 20.92) exceeded that of Interns (84.00 ± 15.26) and SHOs (75.12 ± 18.09). Over half (55 %) of the individual items were rated by the junior doctors as more positive than negative. Nineteen items (48 %) pointed to areas in need of enhancement, whilst 3 items were rated as satisfactory or better. Analysis of qualitative data confirmed that deficiencies exist in various aspects of the educational climate, including protected educational time, access to suitable learning opportunities, the nature of tasks performed by junior doctors, the hospital bleep protocol, implementation of the European Working Time Directive, feedback and career guidance. Recommendations stemming from this study should lead to improvements in the quality of the educational environment of junior doctors and may stimulate similar evaluations in other teaching hospitals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 13%
Other 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 11 28%
Unknown 10 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 50%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2016.
All research outputs
#10,391,641
of 13,029,364 outputs
Outputs from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#451
of 698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,951
of 262,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Irish Journal of Medical Science
#10
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,029,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 698 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 262,098 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.