↓ Skip to main content

How a mobile app supports the learning and practice of newly qualified doctors in the UK: an intervention study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 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
How a mobile app supports the learning and practice of newly qualified doctors in the UK: an intervention study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0356-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison Bullock, Rebecca Dimond, Katie Webb, Joseph Lovatt, Wendy Hardyman, Mark Stacey

Abstract

The transition from medical school to the workplace can be demanding, with high expectations placed on newly qualified doctors. The provision of up-to-date and accurate information is essential to support doctors at a time when they are managing increased responsibility for patient care. In August 2012, the Wales Deanery issued the Dr.Companion© software with five key medical textbooks (the iDoc app) to newly qualified doctors (the intervention). The aim of the study was to examine how a smartphone app with key medical texts was used in clinical workplace settings by newly qualified doctors in relation to other information sources and to report changes over time. Participants (newly qualified - Foundation Year 1 - doctors) completed a baseline questionnaire before downloading the iDoc app to their own personal smartphone device. At the end of Foundation Year 1 participants (n = 125) completed exit questionnaires one year later. We used Wilcoxon Signed Rank test to analyse matched quantitative data. We report significant changes in our participants' use of workplace information resources over the year. Respondents reduced their use of hard-copy and electronic versions of texts on PCs but made more use of senior medical staff. There was no significant difference in the use of peers and other staff as information sources. We found a significant difference in how doctors felt about using a mobile device containing textbooks in front of patients and senior medical staff in the workplace. Our study indicates that a mobile app enabling timely, internet-free access to key textbooks supports the learning and practice of newly qualified doctors. Although participants changed their use of other resources in the workplace, they continued to consult with seniors. Rather than over-reliance on technology, these findings suggest that the app was used strategically to complement, not replace discussion with members of the medical team. Participants' uncertainty about using a mobile device with textbook app in front of others eased over time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 %
Bahamas 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 143 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Other 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 38 26%
Unknown 38 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 32%
Computer Science 10 7%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 44 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 24 July 2015.
All research outputs
#3,157,873
of 23,509,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#524
of 3,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,841
of 266,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#11
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,482 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. 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 266,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.