↓ Skip to main content

Interprofessional collaboration milestones: advocating for common assessment criteria in graduate medical education

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Interprofessional collaboration milestones: advocating for common assessment criteria in graduate medical education
Published in
BMC Medical Education, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0432-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Majken T. Wingo, Rachel DA Havyer, Nneka I. Comfere, Darlene R. Nelson, Darcy A. Reed

Abstract

Milestone-based assessments of resident physicians inform critical decisions regarding resident competence and advancement. Thus, it is essential that milestone evaluations are based upon strong validity evidence and that consistent evaluation criteria are used across residency programs. A common approach to assessment of interprofessional collaboration milestones is particularly important since standardized measures of individual resident competence in interprofessional collaboration have not been established. We propose that assessments of interprofessional collaboration in graduate medical education meet common criteria, namely, these assessments should: 1) measure competency of an individual resident, 2) occur in the context of an interprofessional team, 3) be ascertained via direct observation of the resident, 4) be performed in a real-world clinical practice setting (such as a hospital ward, outpatient clinic, or operating room). We present the evidence-based rationale for these criteria and cite examples of published assessment instruments that fulfill one or more of the criteria, however further research is needed to ensure fidelity of assessments. The proposed criteria may assist residency educators as they endeavor to provide robust and consistent assessments of interprofessional collaboration milestones.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Other 6 10%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 28%
Social Sciences 6 10%
Psychology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 May 2016.
All research outputs
#4,519,046
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#748
of 3,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,634
of 268,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#13
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,321 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 77% 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 268,597 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.