↓ Skip to main content

The effect of white coats and gender on medical students’ perceptions of physicians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, May 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 (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
The effect of white coats and gender on medical students’ perceptions of physicians
Published in
BMC Medical Education, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0932-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malika Ladha, Aleem Bharwani, Kevin McLaughlin, Henry T. Stelfox, Adam Bass

Abstract

Despite the fact that medical schools spend a considerable effort to rate clinical instructors, there is limited evidence regarding the effect of physical characteristics on instructor ratings. White coats have been shown to alter patients' perceptions of physicians although it has not been determined if preceptors who wear white coats are rated differently than their colleagues. Second year medical students were administered a questionnaire with four clinical scenarios depicting medical errors accompanied by a picture of a physician of different sexes and ethnicities. The packages were randomized so that the physicians depicted either had or did not have a white coat. White coats did not alter the perception of physicians' ratings by medical students although sex and ethnicity/case were associated with the perception of trustworthiness, physician management, competence, professionalism and the perception of medical error. Physical characteristics may alter students' ratings of physicians.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Student > Master 5 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 10 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,552,460
of 24,201,556 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#616
of 3,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,715
of 317,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#10
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,201,556 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,681 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 83% 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 317,127 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.