| Title |
Career planning and mentorship: a few key considerations for trainees
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of General Medicine, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijgm.s145481 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sherif M Badawy |
| Abstract |
Publishing and securing funding are considered our "academic currency", and therefore, both should be emphasized during training, both residency and fellowship. Trainees should make an effort to find funding opportunities at or outside of their institutions and try to identify their short- and long-term goals. Establishing a track record of publications can help trainees get hired, funded, and promoted as junior faculty, and effective networking and mentorship are critical determinants of academic success. Given the positive effects of mentorship, trainees should understand what comprises a good mentor-mentee relationship and how to optimize the mentoring process. The objective of this article is to discuss few key considerations for trainees in residency or fellowship regarding mentorship and career planning in academic medicine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Professor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 32% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 October 2017.
All research outputs
#20,110,957
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#997
of 1,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,421
of 331,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 331,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.