↓ Skip to main content

Innovative levers for sustainable integration of gender medicine into medical school curricula

Overview of attention for article published in Biology of Sex Differences, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Innovative levers for sustainable integration of gender medicine into medical school curricula
Published in
Biology of Sex Differences, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13293-016-0103-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cara Tannenbaum, Geneviève Moineau

Abstract

Efforts to integrate gender medicine into medical school curricula have focused largely on the work of individual champions. Online sex and gender materials for undergraduate courses have also been developed and disseminated. Success has been sporadic, with varying uptake across schools within and between countries. International trends in medical school accreditation processes and the growing force of the millennial student voice offer untapped opportunities to promote more systematic integration of gender medicine on a national and international level. In this commentary, the president and CEO of the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada and the Scientific Director of the Institute of Gender and Health of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research jointly reflect on top-down and bottom-up levers for sustainable innovation in gender medicine for undergraduate medical training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Professor 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Social Sciences 2 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 9%
Environmental Science 1 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,992,567
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Biology of Sex Differences
#303
of 473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,311
of 319,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology of Sex Differences
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 319,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.