| Title |
Ophthalmoscopy simulation: advances in training and practice for medical students and young ophthalmologists
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s108041 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lucas Holderegger Ricci, Caroline Amaral Ferraz |
| Abstract |
To describe and appraise the latest simulation models for direct and indirect ophthalmoscopy as a learning tool in the medical field. The present review was conducted using four national and international databases - PubMed, Scielo, Medline and Cochrane. Initial set of articles was screened based on title and abstracts, followed by full text analysis. It comprises of articles that were published in the past fifteen years (2002-2017). Eighty-three articles concerning simulation models for medical education were found in national and international databases, with only a few describing important aspects of ophthalmoscopy training and current application of simulation in medical education. After secondary analysis, 38 articles were included. Different ophthalmoscopy simulation models have been described, but only very few studies appraise the effectiveness of each individual model. Comparison studies are still required to determine best approaches for medical education and skill enhancement through simulation models, applied to both medical students as well as young ophthalmologists in training. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 14 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,340,704
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,331
of 331,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 331,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them