↓ Skip to main content

Efficient undergraduate learning of liver transplant: building a framework for teaching subspecialties to medical students

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Efficient undergraduate learning of liver transplant: building a framework for teaching subspecialties to medical students
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12909-018-1267-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheng-Maw Ho, Jann-Yuan Wang, Chi-Chuan Yeh, Yao-Ming Wu, Ming-Chih Ho, Rey-Heng Hu, Po-Huang Lee

Abstract

Liver recipients may develop various diseases after transplant. However, because of inadequate study of liver transplant during undergraduate education, the quality of post-transplant care provided to these patients remains suboptimal. Herein, we introduce an innovative and integrated multimodal pedagogical approach to effectively disseminate key information regarding liver transplant to undergraduate students. The goal is to examine this approach through students' assessment in multiple dimensions. This prospective observational study evaluated student reactions to our pedagogical approach. Fifth-year medical students during the academic year 2015-2016 attended a 2-h session on what nontransplant doctors should know about liver transplants. The pedagogical strategy consisted of an online preclass self-learning exercise, an in-class interactive discussion (facilitated by the class teacher who is a liver transplant specialist to avoid distractions within the short-time frame), and a postclass essay assignment (to integrate and apply concepts). After the class, questionnaires were distributed to individual students to collect data, if returned, concerning the students' learning experience and feedback to improve teaching quality. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests, chi-squared tests, and McNemar's tests were used to analyze quantitative data. Qualitative data were content-coded through a descriptive approach using thematic analysis. Of the 266 attendees, 263 (98.9%) completed the questionnaires and 182 (69.2%) provided comments. Student feedback indicated they "felt better" and "more satisfied" compared with problem-based learning (PBL) (51.0 and 63.1%, respectively) or large-lecture class (92.0 and 88.6%, respectively) approaches. Regarding confidently managing liver transplant patients in future, 80 (30.4%) and 246 (93.5%) students expressed preclass and postclass confidence, respectively (p < 0.001). The bell curve of the postclass self-assessment score of learning shifted toward right and became steeper compared with that of the preclass score (p < 0.001), suggesting students acquired considerable knowledge. The course was typically perceived to be cost-effective, practical, tension-free, and student-friendly. This pedagogical approach effectively propagated knowledge concerning liver transplant to medical students, who expressed considerable satisfaction with the approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Lecturer 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 29 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Engineering 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 37 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,982,872
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,647
of 3,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,075
of 328,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#74
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,385 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 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 328,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.