↓ Skip to main content

Ethical learning on international medical electives: a case-based analysis of medical student learning experiences

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Ethical learning on international medical electives: a case-based analysis of medical student learning experiences
Published in
BMC Medical Education, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1181-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gemma Bowsher, Laura Parry-Billings, Anna Georgeson, Paula Baraitser

Abstract

Students on international medical electives face complex ethical issues when undertaking clinical work. The variety of elective destinations and the culturally specific nature of clinical ethical issues suggest that pre-elective preparation could be supplemented by in-elective support. An online, asynchronous, case-based discussion was piloted to support ethical learning on medical student electives. We developed six scenarios from elective diaries to stimulate peer-facilitated discussions during electives. We evaluated the transcripts to assess whether transformative, experiential learning took place, assessing specifically for indications that 1) critical reflection, 2) reflective action and 3) reflective learning were taking place. We also completed a qualitative thematic content analysis of the discussions. Of forty-one extended comments, nine responses showed evidence of transformative learning (Mezirow stage three). The thematic analysis identified five themes: adopting a position on ethical issues without overt analysis; presenting issues in terms of their effects on students' ability to complete tasks; describing local contexts and colleagues as "other"; difficulty navigating between individual and structural issues, and overestimation of the impact of individual action on structures and processes. Results suggest a need to: frame ethical learning on elective so that it builds on earlier ethical programmes in the curriculum, and encourages students to adopt structured approaches to complex ethical issues including cross-cultural negotiation and to enhance global health training within the curriculum.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Lecturer 12 11%
Student > Master 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 40 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 30%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Psychology 5 5%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 42 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,014,856
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,526
of 3,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,132
of 329,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#40
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,371 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 54% 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 329,169 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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 50% of its contemporaries.