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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Ten tips to encourage student interaction with screen-capture type vodcasts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s164751 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robin K Pettit |
| Abstract |
Video podcasts (vodcasts) are gaining popularity in medical education, but they can be a passive learning modality if students do not actively engage with the content. Of the two categories of vodcast software, screen-capture (mp4 output) and Flash™ (HTML5/Flash output), screen-capture has greater potential to result in passive learning because students cannot physically interact with the content. However, screen-capture offers several advantages for the producer (often faculty) and the consumer (students). As such, this type of software is popular with medical school faculty. To encourage active learning, ten tips are presented with specific strategies that faculty can use with screen-capture type vodcasts. Many of the tips also apply to Flash-type vodcasts. By incorporating these strategies, faculty with limited technical abilities can create engaging vodcasts that stimulate active learning. |
X Demographics
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 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 | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 26% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 8% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 41% |
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 16 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,963,058
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,514
of 342,669 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 is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.5. 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 342,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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