↓ Skip to main content

EMS providers do not use FOAM for education

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Emergency Medicine, May 2018
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 (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
EMS providers do not use FOAM for education
Published in
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12245-018-0189-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua Bucher, Colleen Donovan, Jonathan McCoy

Abstract

Free open access to medical education (FOAM, #FOAM) is the free availability of educational materials on various medicine topics. We hope to evaluate the use of social media and FOAM by emergency medical services (EMS) providers. We designed an online survey distributed to EMS providers with questions about demographics and social media/FOAM use by providers. The survey was sent to the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) EMS Listserv of medical directors and was asked to be distributed to their respective agencies. The survey was designed to inquire about the providers' knowledge of FOAM and social media and their use of the above for EMS education. There were 169 respondents out of a total of 523 providers yielding a response rate of 32.3%. Fifty-three percent of respondents are paramedics, 37% are EMT-Basic trained, and the remainder (16%) were "other." The minority (20%) of respondents had heard of FOAM. However, 54% of respondents had heard of "free medical education online" regarding pertinent topics. Of the total respondents who used social media for education, 31% used Facebook and 23% used blogs and podcasts as resources for online education. Only 4% of respondents stated they produced FOAM content. Seventy-six percent of respondents said they were "interested" or "very interested" in using FOAM for medical education. If FOAM provided continuing medical education (CME), 83% of respondents would be interested in using it. Social media is not used frequently by EMS providers for the purposes of FOAM. There is interest within EMS providers to use FOAM for education, even if CME was not provided. FOAM can provide a novel area of education for EMS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 31%
Librarian 2 6%
Lecturer 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 8 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 16%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,221,656
of 13,266,991 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#124
of 376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,935
of 270,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,266,991 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 376 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 270,688 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them