↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative and qualitative perceptions of the 2011 residency duty hour restrictions: a multicenter, multispecialty cross-sectional study

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Quantitative and qualitative perceptions of the 2011 residency duty hour restrictions: a multicenter, multispecialty cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0323-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

William S Tierney, Rachel L Elkin, Craig D Nielsen

Abstract

July 2011 saw the implementation of the newest duty hour restrictions, further limiting the working hours of first year residents and necessitating a variety of adaptations on the part of residency programs. The present study sought to characterize the perceived impact of these restrictions on residency program personnel using a multi-specialty and multi-site approach. We developed and administered a survey to internal medicine and general surgery residency programs at three academic medical centers within an urban region. The survey combined quantitative and qualitative components to gain a broader understanding of the impact of the newest regulations. Quantitative responses were compared between Internal Medicine and General Surgery programs with Student t-tests. Other comparisons were performed using ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis testing as appropriate. For all comparisons, the threshold for significance was set at 0.01. Two independent reviewers coded all qualitative data and assigned one or more themes based on content. Descriptive statistics were calculated and the diversity of themes identified. No between-group comparisons were conducted with the qualitative data. We found significant differences in the overall perceptions of duty hour restrictions across specialty (internal medicine more positive than general surgery) and across position (first year residents more positive than senior residents and faculty). Notably, individuals who trained at osteopathic medical schools reported significantly more negative views of the duty hour restrictions than those who had trained at allopathic or international medical schools, suggesting an influence of undergraduate medical training. The complementary qualitative data offered insights into the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the duty hour restrictions, as well as actionable suggestions that could help to improve residency program function. This study characterizes responses to the new duty hour restrictions from a variety of perspectives. Our findings show that individual (type of undergraduate medical education, role in graduate medical education) and program-wide (e.g., specialty) factors contribute to participant satisfaction with DHR. This research highlights the value of a mixed methods approach in the study of duty hour restrictions, with our qualitative arm yielding rich data that complemented and expanded upon the insights derived from the quantitative data.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Unspecified 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 10 26%
Unknown 12 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Unspecified 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 May 2015.
All research outputs
#7,399,977
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,325
of 3,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,228
of 263,386 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#26
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 263,386 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 65% 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 56% of its contemporaries.