↓ Skip to main content

Conceptions of learning factors in postgraduate health sciences master students: a comparative study with non-health science students and between genders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, June 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 (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Conceptions of learning factors in postgraduate health sciences master students: a comparative study with non-health science students and between genders
Published in
BMC Medical Education, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1227-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Campos, Miguel Sola, Antonio Santisteban-Espejo, Ariane Ruyffelaert, Antonio Campos-Sánchez, Ingrid Garzón, Víctor Carriel, Juan de Dios Luna-Del-Castillo, Miguel Ángel Martin-Piedra, Miguel Alaminos

Abstract

The students' conceptions of learning in postgraduate health science master studies are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to compare the factors influencing conceptions of learning in health sciences and non-health sciences students enrolled in postgraduate master programs in order to obtain information that may be useful for students and for future postgraduate programs. A modified version of the Learning Inventory Conception Questionnaire (COLI) was used to compare students' conception learning factors in 131 students at the beginning of their postgraduate studies in health sciences, experimental sciences, arts and humanities and social sciences. The present study demonstrates that a set of factors may influence conception of learning of health sciences postgraduate students, with learning as gaining information, remembering, using, and understanding information, awareness of duty and social commitment being the most relevant. For these students, learning as a personal change, a process not bound by time or place or even as acquisition of professional competences, are less relevant. According to our results, this profile is not affected by gender differences. Our results show that the overall conceptions of learning differ among students of health sciences and non-health sciences (experimental sciences, arts and humanities and social sciences) master postgraduate programs. These finding are potentially useful to foster the learning process of HS students, because if they are metacognitively aware of their own conception or learning, they will be much better equipped to self-regulate their learning behavior in a postgraduate master program in health sciences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 21 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Psychology 4 8%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 23 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#4,629,157
of 25,753,031 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#782
of 4,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,431
of 343,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#21
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,753,031 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,053 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 80% 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 343,367 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.