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 |
Joining the dots: Conditional pass and programmatic assessment enhances recognition of problems with professionalism and factors hampering student progress
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Education, June 2011
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-11-29 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Tim J Wilkinson, Mike J Tweed, Tony G Egan, Anthony N Ali, Jan M McKenzie, MaryLeigh Moore, Joy R Rudland |
Abstract |
Programmatic assessment that looks across a whole year may contribute to better decisions compared with those made from isolated assessments alone. The aim of this study is to describe and evaluate a programmatic system to handle student assessment results that is aligned not only with learning and remediation, but also with defensibility. The key components are standards based assessments, use of "Conditional Pass", and regular progress meetings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | 1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
Saudi Arabia | 1 | 1% |
Thailand | 1 | 1% |
United States | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 65 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
Lecturer | 6 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
Other | 17 | 24% |
Unknown | 18 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 40% |
Social Sciences | 14 | 20% |
Linguistics | 2 | 3% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
Philosophy | 1 | 1% |
Other | 2 | 3% |
Unknown | 22 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,642,365
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#597
of 3,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,945
of 112,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 112,333 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.