↓ Skip to main content

Is perception of quality more important than technical quality in patient video cases?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Is perception of quality more important than technical quality in patient video cases?
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0419-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Damian Roland, David Matheson, Nick Taub, Tim Coats, Monica Lakhanpaul

Abstract

The use of video cases to demonstrate key signs and symptoms in patients (patient video cases or PVCs) is a rapidly expanding field. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether the technical quality, or judgement of quality, of a video clip influences a paediatrician's judgment on acuity of the case and assess the relationship between perception of quality and the technical quality of a selection of video clips. Participants (12 senior consultant paediatricians attending an examination workshop) individually categorised 28 PVCs into one of 3 possible acuities and then described the quality of the image seen. The PVCs had been converted into four different technical qualities (differing bit rates ranging from excellent to low quality). Participants' assessment of quality and the actual industry standard of the PVC were independent (333 distinct observations, spearmans rho = 0.0410, p = 0.4564). Agreement between actual acuity and participants' judgement was generally good at higher acuities but moderate at medium/low acuities of illness (overall correlation 0.664). Perception of the quality of the clip was related to correct assignment of acuity regardless of the technical quality of the clip (number of obs = 330, z = 2.07, p = 0.038). It is important to benchmark PVCs prior to use in learning resources as experts may not agree on the information within, or quality of, the clip. It appears, although PVCs may be beneficial in a pedagogical context, the perception of quality of clip may be an important determinant of an expert's decision making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 20%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Master 3 12%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 7 28%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 48%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 2 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 26 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,213,474
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#344
of 3,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,495
of 264,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#3
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,320 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 89% 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 264,395 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.