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 |
Effects of coaching supervision, mentoring supervision and abusive supervision on talent development among trainee doctors in public hospitals: moderating role of clinical learning environment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-015-0407-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anusuiya Subramaniam, Abu Daud Silong, Jegak Uli, Ismi Arif Ismail |
| Abstract |
Effective talent development requires robust supervision. However, the effects of supervisory styles (coaching, mentoring and abusive supervision) on talent development and the moderating effects of clinical learning environment in the relationship between supervisory styles and talent development among public hospital trainee doctors have not been thoroughly researched. In this study, we aim to achieve the following, (1) identify the extent to which supervisory styles (coaching, mentoring and abusive supervision) can facilitate talent development among trainee doctors in public hospital and (2) examine whether coaching, mentoring and abusive supervision are moderated by clinical learning environment in predicting talent development among trainee doctors in public hospital. A questionnaire-based critical survey was conducted among trainee doctors undergoing housemanship at six public hospitals in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. Prior permission was obtained from the Ministry of Health Malaysia to conduct the research in the identified public hospitals. The survey yielded 355 responses. The results were analysed using SPSS 20.0 and SEM with AMOS 20.0. The findings of this research indicate that coaching and mentoring supervision are positively associated with talent development, and that there is no significant relationship between abusive supervision and talent development. The findings also support the moderating role of clinical learning environment on the relationships between coaching supervision-talent development, mentoring supervision-talent development and abusive supervision-talent development among public hospital trainee doctors. Overall, the proposed model indicates a 26 % variance in talent development. This study provides an improved understanding on the role of the supervisory styles (coaching and mentoring supervision) on facilitating talent development among public hospital trainee doctors. Furthermore, this study extends the literature to better understand the effects of supervisory styles on trainee doctors' talent development are contigent on the trainee doctors' clinical learning environment. In summary, supervisors are stakeholders with the responsibility of facilitating learning conditions that hold sufficient structure and support to optimise the trainee doctors learning. |
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 States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 221 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 62 | 28% |
| Unknown | 49 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 61 | 28% |
| Social Sciences | 25 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 22 | 10% |
| Psychology | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Unknown | 54 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 2016.
All research outputs
#13,445,400
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,711
of 3,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,452
of 264,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#28
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 264,396 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 51% 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 is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.