↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Complementary and alternative medicine in US medical schools

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Medical Education and Practice, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Complementary and alternative medicine in US medical schools
Published in
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, February 2015
DOI 10.2147/amep.s69761
Pubmed ID
Authors

Virginia S Cowen, Vicki Cyr

Abstract

An analysis of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in US medical school curriculum was undertaken. Websites for 130 US medical schools were systematically analyzed for course listings and content. Half of the schools (50.8%) offered at least one CAM course or clerkship. A total of 127 different course listings were identified, embracing a range of topics and methods of instruction. The most frequently listed topics were traditional medicine, acupuncture, spirituality, and herbs, along with the general topic of CAM. Nearly 25.0% of the courses referenced personal growth or self-care through CAM practices, while only 11.0% referenced inter-professional education activities involving interaction with CAM providers. The most frequently reported instructional methods were lectures, readings, and observation of, or receiving a CAM treatment. The findings of this analysis indicated fewer medical schools offered instruction in CAM than previously reported and a wide range of approaches to the topic across the schools where CAM is taught.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 September 2021.
All research outputs
#7,180,078
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,696
of 363,153 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 4.5. 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 363,153 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 74% 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