You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Non-Technical Skills Bingo—a game to facilitate the learning of complex concepts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Simulation, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41077-016-0024-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Dieckmann, Ronnie Glavin, Rikke Malene Hartvigsen Grønholm Jepsen, Ralf Krage |
| Abstract |
Acquiring the concepts of non-technical skills (NTS) beyond a superficial level is a challenge for healthcare professionals and simulation faculty. Current simulation-based approaches to teach NTS are challenged when learners have to master NTS concepts, clinically challenging situations, and simulation as a complex technique. The combination of all three aspects might overwhelm learners. To facilitate the deeper comprehension of NTS concepts, we describe an innovative video-based game, the Non-Technical Skills (NTS) Bingo. Participants get NTS Bingo cards that show five NTS elements each. While observing (non-medical) video clips, they try to find examples for the elements on their cards, typically observable behaviours that match a given element. After the video, participants "defend" their solution in a discussion with the game leader and other players. This discussion and the reflection aim to deepen the processing of the NTS concepts. We provide practical guidance for the conduct of NTS Bingo, including a selection of usable video clips and tips for the facilitated discussion after a clip. We use NTS in anaesthesia as example and provide guidance on how to adapt NTS Bingo to other disciplines. NTS Bingo is based on theoretical considerations on concept learning, which we describe to support the rationale for its conduct. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 14% |
| Canada | 5 | 14% |
| Australia | 3 | 8% |
| Sweden | 3 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Myanmar | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 59% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 27% |
| Scientists | 3 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 10 June 2021.
All research outputs
#1,503,446
of 25,240,298 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#59
of 270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,870
of 373,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,240,298 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 270 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 373,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.