↓ Skip to main content

Longitudinal evaluation of a pilot e-portfolio-based supervision programme for final year medical students: views of students, supervisors and new graduates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Longitudinal evaluation of a pilot e-portfolio-based supervision programme for final year medical students: views of students, supervisors and new graduates
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0981-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gillian H. S. Vance, Bryan Burford, Ethan Shapiro, Richard Price

Abstract

Little is known about how best to implement portfolio-based learning in medical school. We evaluated the introduction of a formative e-portfolio-based supervision pilot for final year medical students by seeking views of students, supervisors and graduates on use and educational effects. Students and supervisors were surveyed by questionnaire, with free text comments invited. Interviews were held with new graduates in their first Foundation Programme placement. Most students used the e-portfolio (54%) and met with their supervisor (62%) 'once or twice' only. Students had more negative views: 22% agreed that the pilot was beneficial, while most supervisors thought that e-portfolio (72%) and supervision (86%) were a 'good idea'. More students reported supervision meetings benefited learning (49%) and professional development (55%) than the e-portfolio did (16%; 28%). Only 47% of students felt 'prepared' for future educational processes, though graduates noted benefits for navigating and understanding e-portfolio building and supervision. Factors limiting engagement reflected 'burden', while supervision meetings and early experience of postgraduate processes offered educational value. Final year students have negative attitudes to a formative e-portfolio, though benefits for easing the educational transition are recognised by graduates. Measures to minimize time, repetition and redundancy of processes may encourage use. Engagement is influenced by the supervisor relationship and educational value may be best achieved by supporting supervisors to develop strategies to facilitate, and motivate self-directed learning processes in undergraduates.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 9 26%
Researcher 7 20%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor 4 11%
Other 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 40%
Unspecified 12 34%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 3 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,523,714
of 12,555,036 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#817
of 1,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,732
of 264,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,555,036 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
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 264,490 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 59% 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