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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The status of evolutionary medicine education in North American medical schools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-015-0322-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brandon H Hidaka, Anila Asghar, C Athena Aktipis, Randolph M Nesse, Terry M Wolpaw, Nicole K Skursky, Katelyn J Bennett, Matthew W Beyrouty, Mark D Schwartz |
| Abstract |
Medical and public health scientists are using evolution to devise new strategies to solve major health problems. But based on a 2003 survey, medical curricula may not adequately prepare physicians to evaluate and extend these advances. This study assessed the change in coverage of evolution in North American medical schools since 2003 and identified opportunities for enriching medical education. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 46% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 54% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 23% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 17% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Professor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,989,850
of 23,292,144 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#278
of 3,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,583
of 259,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#9
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,292,144 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,431 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 259,812 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.