↓ Skip to main content

Supervision and autonomy of ophthalmology residents in the outpatient Clinic in the United States: a survey of ACGME-accredited programs

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Supervision and autonomy of ophthalmology residents in the outpatient Clinic in the United States: a survey of ACGME-accredited programs
Published in
BMC Medical Education, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0941-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric L. Singman, Divya Srikumaran, Laura Green, Jing Tian, Peter McDonnell

Abstract

The development and demonstration of incremental trainee autonomy is required by the ACGME. However, there is scant published research concerning autonomy of ophthalmology residents in the outpatient clinic setting. This study explored the landscape of resident ophthalmology outpatient clinics in the United States. A link to an online survey using the QualtricsTM platform was emailed to the program directors of all 115 ACGME-accredited ophthalmology programs in the United States. Survey questions explored whether resident training programs hosted a continuity clinic where residents would see their own patients, and if so, the degree of faculty supervision provided therein. Metrics such as size of the resident program, number of faculty and clinic setting were also recorded. Correlations between the degree of faculty supervision and other metrics were explored. The response rate was 94%; 69% of respondents indicated that their trainees hosted continuity clinics. Of those programs, 30% required a faculty member to see each patient treated by a resident, while 42% expected the faculty member to at least discuss (if not see) each patient. All programs expected some degree of faculty interaction based upon circumstances such as the level of training of the resident or complexity of the clinical situation. 67% of programs that tracked the contribution of the clinic to resident surgical caseloads reported that these clinics provided more than half of the resident surgical volumes. More ¾ of resident clinics were located in urban settings. The degree of faculty supervision did not correlate to any of the other metrics evaluated. The majority of ophthalmology resident training programs in the United States host a continuity clinic located in an urban environment where residents follow their own patients. Furthermore, most of these clinics require supervising faculty to review both the patients seen and the medical documentation created by the resident encounters. The different degrees of faculty supervision outlined by this survey might provide a useful guide presuming they can be correlated with validated metrics of educational quality. Finally, this study could provide an adjunctive resource to current international efforts to standardize ophthalmic residency education.

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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 14%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Unspecified 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 12 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 37%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Unspecified 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 37%
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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,942,299
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,159
of 3,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,919
of 315,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#31
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,352 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 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 315,536 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.