↓ Skip to main content

Simulation Technology for Skills Training and Competency Assessment in Medical Education

Overview of attention for article published in JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
228 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
411 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Simulation Technology for Skills Training and Competency Assessment in Medical Education
Published in
JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2007
DOI 10.1007/s11606-007-0283-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ross J. Scalese, Vivian T. Obeso, S. Barry Issenberg

Abstract

Medical education during the past decade has witnessed a significant increase in the use of simulation technology for teaching and assessment. Contributing factors include: changes in health care delivery and academic environments that limit patient availability as educational opportunities; worldwide attention focused on the problem of medical errors and the need to improve patient safety; and the paradigm shift to outcomes-based education with its requirements for assessment and demonstration of competence. The use of simulators addresses many of these issues: they can be readily available at any time and can reproduce a wide variety of clinical conditions on demand. In lieu of the customary (and arguably unethical) system, whereby novices carry out the practice required to master various techniques--including invasive procedures--on real patients, simulation-based education allows trainees to hone their skills in a risk-free environment. Evaluators can also use simulators for reliable assessments of competence in multiple domains. For those readers less familiar with medical simulators, this article aims to provide a brief overview of these educational innovations and their uses; for decision makers in medical education, we hope to broaden awareness of the significant potential of these new technologies for improving physician training and assessment, with a resultant positive impact on patient safety and health care outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 411 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 3%
United Kingdom 10 2%
Brazil 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Turkey 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Other 11 3%
Unknown 364 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 75 18%
Student > Bachelor 48 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 11%
Researcher 42 10%
Other 35 9%
Other 167 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 200 49%
Social Sciences 50 12%
Unspecified 26 6%
Computer Science 26 6%
Engineering 26 6%
Other 83 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 14 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,598,543
of 11,437,959 outputs
Outputs from JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,070
of 4,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,983
of 104,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine
#7
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,437,959 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 104,110 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.