| Title |
A student-run peer-reviewed journal: an educational tool for students in the health sciences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s27149 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Raywat Deonandan, Premal Patel, Robyn Winterbottom |
| Abstract |
Students at the University of Ottawa, many of whom were targeting a career in medicine, were surveyed to determine their attitudes and expectations regarding a new student-run peer-reviewed journal for the health sciences. A number of students reported that the existence of the journal would make them more likely to take a class with a written component, while a majority would work harder on that assignment. Those intending to pursue postgraduate or professional studies were most likely to recognize the value to their careers of having a publication history. We argue that student-run medical communication endeavors such as this are beneficial both for enhancing student careers and for contributing to a more thorough educational experience. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 43% |
| United States | 3 | 43% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 38% |
| Librarian | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 February 2012.
All research outputs
#6,346,745
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,211
of 255,195 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. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. 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 255,195 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 79% 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