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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
JGME-ALiEM Hot Topics in Medical Education: Analysis of a Multimodal Online Discussion About Team-Based Learning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Graduate Medical Education, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.4300/jgme-d-16-00067.1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeff Riddell, Catherine Patocka, Michelle Lin, Jonathan Sherbino |
| Abstract |
Team-based learning (TBL) is an instructional method that is being increasingly incorporated in health professions education, although use in graduate medical education (GME) has been more limited. To curate and describe themes that emerged from a virtual journal club discussion about TBL in GME, held across multiple digital platforms, while also evaluating the use of social media in online academic discussions. The Journal of Graduate Medical Education (JGME) and the Academic Life in Emergency Medicine blog facilitated a weeklong, open-access, virtual journal club on the 2015 JGME article "Use of Team-Based Learning Pedagogy for Internal Medicine Ambulatory Resident Teaching." Using 4 stimulus questions (hosted on a blog as a starting framework), we facilitated discussions via the blog, Twitter, and Google Hangouts on Air platforms. We evaluated 2-week web analytics and performed a thematic analysis of the discussion. The virtual journal club reached a large international audience as exemplified by the blog page garnering 685 page views from 241 cities in 42 countries. Our thematic analysis identified 4 domains relevant to TBL in GME: (1) the benefits and barriers to TBL; (2) the design of teams; (3) the role of assessment and peer evaluation; and (4) crowdsourced TBL resources. The virtual journal club provided a novel forum across multiple social media platforms, engaging authors, content experts, and the health professions education community in a discussion about the importance, impediments to implementation, available resources, and logistics of adopting TBL in GME. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 | 8 | 40% |
| Canada | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 45% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 35% |
| Scientists | 4 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 79 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 19% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 34% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 18 March 2017.
All research outputs
#1,769,834
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Graduate Medical Education
#283
of 1,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,049
of 428,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Graduate Medical Education
#5
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 428,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.