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 |
Evaluation of self-educational training methods to learn laparoscopic skills - a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-018-1193-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steffen Axt, Pirmin Storz, Carolin Ehrenberg, Claudius Falch, Marc Immenroth, Andreas Kirschniak, Sven Muller |
| Abstract |
Evaluation of two different self-educational methods (video assisted learning versus video assisted learning plus a nodal point operation primer) on learning laparoscopic suturing and intracorporal knotting. Randomized controlled trial at the laparoscopic surgical training center, University of Tubingen with 45 surgical novices first year medical students being pretested for dexterity. After self-educational training for 90 min with either method (Group A: video assisted learning, Group B: video assisted learning plus a nodal point operation primer) participants had to perform five laparoscopic intracorporal knots. Assessed were number of knots completed (maximum of five knots counted, knot integrity, technical proficiency and knotting time per knot. Primary outcome measure is a composed knot score combining knot integrity, technical proficiency and knotting time. Group B (n = 23) achieved a significantly higher composed knot score than Group A (n = 22) (53.3 ± 8.4 versus 46.5 ± 13.6 points respectively, p = 0.016). Median knotting time per completed knot was significantly different between Group B and Group A (308 s [100-1221] versus 394 s [138-1397] respectively, p = 0.001). Concerning number of completed knots there was a trend towards more knots achieved in Group B (4.2 ± 1.2 versus 3.55 ± 1.4 respectively, p = 0.075) . The use of a nodal point operation primer highlighting essential key steps of a procedure augment the success of learning laparoscopic skills as suturing and intracorporal knotting. (UIN researchregistry3866, March 22, 2018). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 46% |
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 03 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,508,366
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,290
of 3,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,964
of 326,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#70
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,373 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 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 326,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.