↓ Skip to main content

A comparative study: do “clickers” increase student engagement in multidisciplinary clinical microbiology teaching?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
A comparative study: do “clickers” increase student engagement in multidisciplinary clinical microbiology teaching?
Published in
BMC Medical Education, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0906-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niall T. Stevens, Hélène McDermott, Fiona Boland, Teresa Pawlikowska, Hilary Humphreys

Abstract

Audience response devices, or "clickers", have been used in the education of future healthcare professionals for several years with varying success. They have been reported to improve the learning experience by promoting engagement and knowledge retention. In 2014, our department evaluated the use of "clickers" in a newly introduced multidisciplinary approach to teaching large groups of third year medical students clinical cases developed around a microbiology theme. Six multidisciplinary teaching sessions covering community-acquired pneumonia, tuberculosis, infective endocarditis, peritonitis, bloodstream infection with pyelonephritis and bacterial meningitis were included in the study. Three involved the use of the "clickers" and three did not. Consenting undergraduate students attended the designated classes and afterwards answered a short online quiz relating to the session. Students also answered a short questionnaire about the "clickers" to gauge their attitudes on the use of these devices. Of 310 students, 294 (94.8%) agreed to participate in the study. Interestingly, the grades of online quizzes after a session where a "clicker" was used were slightly lower. Looking only at the grades of students who engaged completely with the process (n = 19), there was no statistical difference to suggest that the devices had a positive or negative impact on knowledge retention. However, student attitudes to using the devices were positive overall. Fifty-five percent strongly agreed and 27% agreed that teaching sessions where the "clickers" were used were more engaging. Thirty-four percent strongly agreed and 36% agreed that the "clickers" made important concepts more memorable and 54% felt the device enhanced their understanding of the topic being covered. Overall, it appears that "clickers" help in improving student engagement in large classroom environments, enhance the learning experience, and are received positively by medical students but their impact on knowledge retention is variable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 97 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 8 8%
Lecturer 8 8%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 29 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 19%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Chemistry 4 4%
Other 23 23%
Unknown 36 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 June 2022.
All research outputs
#3,598,153
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#585
of 3,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,392
of 309,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#12
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,305 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 309,166 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.