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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Technical Standards and Deaf and Hard of Hearing Medical School Applicants and Students: Interrogating Sensory Capacity and Practice Capacity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AMA Journal of Ethics, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.10.sect1-1610 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Abstract |
Applicants to medical schools who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHoH) or who have other disabilities face significant barriers to medical school admission. One commonly cited barrier to admission is medical schools' technical standards (TS) for admission, advancement, and graduation. Ethical values of diversity and equity support altering the technical standards to be more inclusive of people with disabilities. Incorporating these values into admissions, advancement, and graduation considerations for DHoH and other students with disabilities can contribute to the physician workforce being more representative of the diverse patients it serves and better able to care for them. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 16 | 67% |
| Canada | 3 | 13% |
| Finland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 58% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 25% |
| Scientists | 2 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Librarian | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 17 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 12% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 40% |