↓ Skip to main content

Enhancing paramedics procedural skills using a cadaveric model

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Enhancing paramedics procedural skills using a cadaveric model
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6920-14-138
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Lim, Stephen Bartlett, Peter Horrocks, Courtenay Grant-Wakefield, Jodie Kelly, Vivienne Tippett

Abstract

Paramedic education has evolved in recent times from vocational post-employment to tertiary pre-employment supplemented by clinical placement. Simulation is advocated as a means of transferring learned skills to clinical practice. Sole reliance of simulation learning using mannequin-based models may not be sufficient to prepare students for variance in human anatomy. In 2012, we trialled the use of fresh frozen human cadavers to supplement undergraduate paramedic procedural skill training. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether cadaveric training is an effective adjunct to mannequin simulation and clinical placement.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 79 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 3 4%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 26 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Engineering 7 9%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Psychology 4 5%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 27 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 August 2014.
All research outputs
#6,566,563
of 23,510,717 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,103
of 3,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,776
of 227,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#23
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,510,717 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,482 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 227,330 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 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 61% of its contemporaries.