↓ Skip to main content

Intraprofessional collaboration and learning between specialists and general practitioners during postgraduate training: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
Intraprofessional collaboration and learning between specialists and general practitioners during postgraduate training: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1619-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Loes J. Meijer, Esther de Groot, Mirjam Blaauw-Westerlaken, Roger A. M. J. Damoiseaux

Abstract

During postgraduate training, general practitioners and other specialists must learn how to deliver shared care to patients; however, the development of formal intraprofessional education is often hampered by curricular constraints. Delivering shared care in everyday work provides trainees with opportunities for informal learning from, about and with one another. Twelve semi-structured interviews were undertaken with trainee general practitioners and specialists (internal medicine or surgery). A thematic analysis of the input was undertaken and a qualitative description developed. Trainees from different disciplines frequently interact, often by telephone, but generally they learn in a reactive manner. All trainees are highly motivated by the desire to provide good patient care. Specialist trainees learn about the importance of understanding the background of the patient from GPs, while GP trainees gain medical knowledge from the interaction. Trainees from different disciplines are not very motivated to build relationships with each other and have fewer opportunities to do so. Supervisors can play an important role in providing intraprofessional learning opportunities for trainees. During postgraduate training, opportunities for intraprofessional learning occur, but there is much room for improvement. For example, supervisors could increase the involvement of trainees in collaborative tasks and create more awareness of informal learning opportunities. This could assist trainees to learn collaborative skills that will enhance patient care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 34%
Social Sciences 9 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 16%
Computer Science 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 11 20%

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 13 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,232,624
of 8,208,063 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,508
of 3,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,452
of 256,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#184
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,208,063 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 256,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.