↓ Skip to main content

Overspecialized and undertrained? Patient diversity encountered by medical students during their internal medicine clerkship at a university hospital

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Overspecialized and undertrained? Patient diversity encountered by medical students during their internal medicine clerkship at a university hospital
Published in
BMC Medical Education, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0353-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Melderis, Jan-Philipp Gutowski, Sigrid Harendza

Abstract

During the four-month internal medicine clerkship in their final year, undergraduate medical students are closely involved in patient care. Little is known about what constitutes their typical learning experiences with respect to patient diversity within the different subspecialties of internal medicine and during on call hours. 25 final year medical students (16 female, 9 male) on their internal medicine clerkship participated in this observational single-center study. To detail the patient diversity encountered by medical students at a university hospital during their 16-week internal medicine clerkship, all participants self-reported their patient contacts in the different subspecialties and during on call hours on patient encounter cards. Patients' chief complaint, suspected main diagnosis, planned diagnostic investigations, and therapy in seven different internal medicine subspecialties and the on call medicine service were documented. 496 PECs were analysed in total. The greatest diversity of chief complaints (CC) and suspected main diagnoses (SMD) was observed in patients encountered on call, with the combined frequencies of the three most common CCs or SMDs accounting for only 23% and 25%, respectively. Combined, the three most commonly encountered CC/SMD accounted for high percentages (82%/63%), i.e. less diversity, in oncology and low percentages (37%/32%), i.e. high diversity, in nephrology. The percentage of all diagnostic investigations and therapies that were classified as "basic" differed between the subspecialties from 82%/94% (on call) to 37%/50% (pulmonology/oncology). The only subspecialty with no significant difference compared with on call was nephrology for diagnostic investigations. With respect to therapy, nephrology and infectious diseases showed no significant differences compared with on call. Internal medicine clerkships at a university hospital provide students with a very limited patient diversity in most internal medicine subspecialties. Shadowing the on call resident or shorter rotations could provide a more extended patient diversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 18%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Professor 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 32%
Social Sciences 3 14%
Psychology 2 9%
Computer Science 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 May 2015.
All research outputs
#4,501,416
of 22,797,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#749
of 3,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,656
of 264,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#15
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,797,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,314 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 77% 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 264,714 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 78% 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 75% of its contemporaries.