↓ Skip to main content

Hypothesis: the hospital learning environment impedes students’ acquisition of reflectivity and medical professionalism

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 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
Hypothesis: the hospital learning environment impedes students’ acquisition of reflectivity and medical professionalism
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10459-018-9818-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jochanan Benbassat

Abstract

Undergraduate clinical education follows the "bedside" tradition that exposes students to inpatients. However, the hospital learning environment has two main limitations. First, most inpatients require acute care, and students may complete their training without seeing patients with frequent non-emergent and chronic diseases that are managed in outpatient settings. Second, students rarely cope with diagnostic problems, because most inpatients are diagnosed in the community or the emergency room. These limitations have led some medical schools to offer longitudinal integrated clerkships in community settings instead of hospital block clerkship rotations. In this paper, I propose the hypothesis that the hospital learning environment has a third limitation: it causes students' distress and delays their development of reflectivity and medical professionalism. This hypothesis is supported by evidence that (a) the clinical learning environment, rather than students' personality traits, is the major driver of students' distress, and (b) the development of attributes, such as moral reasoning, empathy, emotional intelligence and tolerance of uncertainty that are included in the definitions of both reflectivity and medical professionalism, is arrested during undergraduate medical training. Future research may test the proposed hypothesis by comparing students' development of these attributes during clerkships in hospital wards with that during longitudinal clerkships in community settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 148 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 5%
Researcher 6 4%
Other 32 22%
Unknown 70 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 18%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Psychology 8 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 79 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 November 2019.
All research outputs
#13,584,037
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#539
of 856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,738
of 330,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 330,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.