↓ Skip to main content

A model of self-directed learning in internal medicine residency: a qualitative study using grounded theory

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 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 model of self-directed learning in internal medicine residency: a qualitative study using grounded theory
Published in
BMC Medical Education, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0869-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam P. Sawatsky, John T. Ratelle, Sara L. Bonnes, Jason S. Egginton, Thomas J. Beckman

Abstract

Existing theories of self-directed learning (SDL) have emphasized the importance of process, personal, and contextual factors. Previous medical education research has largely focused on the process of SDL. We explored the experience with and perception of SDL among internal medicine residents to gain understanding of the personal and contextual factors of SDL in graduate medical education. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted 7 focus group interviews with 46 internal medicine residents at an academic medical center. We processed the data by using open coding and writing analytic memos. Team members organized open codes to create axial codes, which were applied to all transcripts. Guided by a previous model of SDL, we developed a theoretical model that was revised through constant comparison with new data as they were collected, and we refined the theory until it had adequate explanatory power and was appropriately grounded in the experiences of residents. We developed a theoretical model of SDL to explain the process, personal, and contextual factors affecting SDL during residency training. The process of SDL began with a trigger that uncovered a knowledge gap. Residents progressed to formulating learning objectives, using resources, applying knowledge, and evaluating learning. Personal factors included motivations, individual characteristics, and the change in approach to SDL over time. Contextual factors included the need for external guidance, the influence of residency program structure and culture, and the presence of contextual barriers. We developed a theoretical model of SDL in medical education that can be used to promote and assess resident SDL through understanding the process, person, and context of SDL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 150 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Other 11 7%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Lecturer 10 7%
Other 41 27%
Unknown 42 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 26%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 7%
Psychology 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 49 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,887,790
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,618
of 3,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#293,629
of 420,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#41
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. 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 420,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.