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 |
Ready for SDM: evaluating a train-the-trainer program to facilitate implementation of SDM training in Norway
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, April 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-021-01494-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simone Kienlin, Marie-Eve Poitras, Dawn Stacey, Kari Nytrøen, Jürgen Kasper |
| Abstract |
Healthcare providers need training to implement shared decision making (SDM). In Norway, we developed "Ready for SDM", a comprehensive SDM curriculum tailored to various healthcare providers, settings, and competence levels, including a course targeting interprofessional healthcare teams. The overall aim was to evaluate a train-the-trainer (TTT) program for healthcare providers wanting to offer this course within their hospital trust. Our observational descriptive design was informed by Kirkpatrick´s Model of Educational Outcomes. The South-Eastern Regional Health Authority invited healthcare providers from all health trusts in its jurisdiction to attend. The TTT consisted of a one-day basic course with lectures on SDM, exercises and group reflections followed by a two-day advanced course including an SDM observer training. Immediately after each of the two courses, reaction and learning (Kirkpatrick levels 1 and 2) were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire. After the advanced course, observer skills were operationalized as accuracy of the participants' assessment of a consultation compared to an expert assessment. Within three months post-training, we measured number of trainings conducted and number of healthcare providers trained (Kirkpatrick level 3) using an online survey. Qualitative and quantitative descriptive analysis were performed. Twenty-one out of 24 (basic) and 19 out of 22 (advanced) healthcare providers in 9 health trusts consented to participate. The basic course was evaluated as highly acceptable, the advanced course as complex and challenging. Participants identified a need for more training in pedagogical skills and support for planning implementation of SDM-training. Participants achieved high knowledge scores and were positive about being an SDM trainer. Observer skills regarding patient involvement in decision-making were excellent (mean of weighted t = .80). After three months, 67% of TTT participants had conducted more than two trainings each and trained a total of 458 healthcare providers. Findings suggest that the TTT is a feasible approach for supporting large-scale training in SDM. Our study informed us about how to improve the advanced course. Further research shall investigate the efficacy of the training in the context of a comprehensive multifaceted strategy for implementing SDM in clinical practice. Retrospectively registered at ISRCTN (99432465) March 25, 2020. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 5 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 75% |
| Scientists | 3 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Librarian | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 38 | 66% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 69% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,530,927
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#185
of 2,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,920
of 437,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#6
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,024 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 437,141 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.