↓ Skip to main content

The Academy for Future Science Faculty: randomized controlled trial of theory-driven coaching to shape development and diversity of early-career scientists

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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 Academy for Future Science Faculty: randomized controlled trial of theory-driven coaching to shape development and diversity of early-career scientists
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6920-14-160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bhoomi K Thakore, Michelle E Naffziger-Hirsch, Jennifer L Richardson, Simon N Williams, Richard McGee,

Abstract

Approaches to training biomedical scientists have created a talented research community. However, they have failed to create a professional workforce that includes many racial and ethnic minorities and women in proportion to their representation in the population or in PhD training. This is particularly true at the faculty level. Explanations for the absence of diversity in faculty ranks can be found in social science theories that reveal processes by which individuals develop identities, experiences, and skills required to be seen as legitimate within the profession.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 107 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Master 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 32 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 14 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 11%
Psychology 11 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 5%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 36 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 22 September 2023.
All research outputs
#2,763,018
of 24,988,588 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#447
of 3,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,178
of 235,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#12
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,988,588 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,877 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 88% 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 235,634 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 88% 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 done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.