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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Enhancing motivation with the “virtual” supervisory role: a randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-015-0348-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Majken T Wingo, Kris G Thomas, Warren G Thompson, David A Cook |
| Abstract |
We aimed to explore the influence of a motivationally-enhanced instructional design on motivation to learn and knowledge, hypothesizing that outcomes would be higher for the enhanced instructional format. Medicine residents completed four online learning modules on primary care topics. Using a crossover design, learners were randomized to receive two standard and two motivationally-enhanced learning modules. Both formats had self-assessment questions, but the enhanced format questions were framed to place learners in a supervisory/teaching role. Learners received a baseline motivation questionnaire, a short motivation survey before and after each module, and a knowledge posttest. One hundred twenty seven residents were randomized. 123 residents (97%) completed at least one knowledge posttest and 119 (94%) completed all four posttests. Across all modules, a one-point increase in the pretest short motivation survey was associated with a 2.1-point increase in posttest knowledge. The change in motivation was significantly higher for the motivationally enhanced format (standard mean change -0.01, enhanced mean change +0.09, difference = 0.10, CI 0.001 to 0.19; p = 0.048). Mean posttest knowledge score was similar (standard mean 72.8, enhanced mean 73.0, difference = 0.2, CI -1.9 to 2.1; p = 0.90). The motivationally enhanced instructional format improved motivation more than the standard format, but impact on knowledge scores was small and not statistically significant. Learners with higher pre-intervention motivation scored better on post-intervention knowledge tests, suggesting that motivation may prove a viable target for future instructional enhancements. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 19% |
| Psychology | 3 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#20,269,439
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#3,132
of 3,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,461
of 264,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#54
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 264,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.