↓ Skip to main content

Sharing simulation-based training courses between institutions: opportunities and challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Simulation, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Sharing simulation-based training courses between institutions: opportunities and challenges
Published in
Advances in Simulation, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41077-016-0034-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Torrey A. Laack, Ellen A. Lones, Donna R. Schumacher, Frances M. Todd, David A. Cook

Abstract

Sharing simulation-based training (SBT) courses between institutions could reduce time to develop new content but also presents challenges. We evaluate the process of sharing SBT courses across institutions in a mixed method study estimating the time required and identifying barriers and potential solutions. Two US academic medical institutions explored instructor experiences with the process of sharing four courses (two at each site) using personal interviews and a written survey and estimated the time needed to develop new content vs implement existing SBT courses. The project team spent approximately 618 h creating a collaboration infrastructure to support course sharing. Sharing two SBT courses was estimated to save 391 h compared with developing two new courses. In the qualitative analysis, participants noted the primary benefit of course sharing was time savings. Barriers included difficulty finding information and understanding overall course flow. Suggestions for improvement included establishing a standardized template, clearly identifying the target audience, providing a course overview, communicating with someone familiar with the original SBT course, employing an intuitive file-sharing platform, and considering local culture, context, and needs. Sharing SBT courses between institutions is feasible but not without challenges. An initial investment in a sharing infrastructure may facilitate downstream time savings compared with developing content de novo.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 7 29%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 42%
Computer Science 2 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 March 2022.
All research outputs
#7,357,513
of 23,419,482 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#199
of 242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,629
of 422,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,419,482 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 422,940 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.