↓ Skip to main content

A survey of perceived training differences between ophthalmology residents in Hong Kong and China

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
A survey of perceived training differences between ophthalmology residents in Hong Kong and China
Published in
BMC Medical Education, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0440-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alvin L. Young, Vishal Jhanji, Yuanbo Liang, Nathan Congdon, Simon Chow, Fenghua Wang, Xiujuan Zhang, Xiaofei Man, Mingming Yang, Zhong Lin, Hunter GL Yuen, Dennis SC Lam

Abstract

To study the differences in ophthalmology resident training between China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Training programs were selected from among the largest and best-known teaching hospitals. Ophthalmology residents were sent an anonymous 48-item questionnaire by mail. Work satisfaction, time allocation between training activities and volume of surgery performed were determined. 50/75 residents (66.7 %) from China and 20/26 (76.9 %) from HKSAR completed the survey. Age (28.9 ± 2.5 vs. 30.2 ± 2.9 years, p = 0.15) and number of years in training (3.4 ± 1.6 vs. 2.8 ± 1.5, p = 0.19) were comparable between groups. The number of cataract procedures performed by HKSAR trainees (extra-capsular, median 80.0, quartile range: 30.0, 100.0; phacoemulsification, median: 20.0, quartile range: 0.0, 100.0) exceeded that for Chinese residents (extra-capsular: median = 0, p < 0.0001; phacoemulsification: median = 0, p < 0.0001). Chinese trainees spent more time completing medical charts (>50 % of time on charts: 62.5 % versus 5.3 %, p < 0.0001) and received less supervision (≥90 % of training supervised: 4.4 % versus 65 %, p < 0.0001). Chinese residents were more likely to feel underpaid (96.0 % vs. 31.6 %, p < 0.0001) and hoped their children would not practice medicine (69.4 % vs. 5.0 %, p = 0.0001) compared HKSAR residents. In this study, ophthalmology residents in China report strikingly less surgical experience and supervision, and lower satisfaction than HKSAR residents. The HKSAR model of hands-on resident training might be useful in improving the low cataract surgical rate in China.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Professor 3 9%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 50%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Psychology 1 3%
Philosophy 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 9 28%

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 29 September 2015.
All research outputs
#5,467,294
of 6,417,267 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#957
of 1,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,405
of 201,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#54
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,417,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 201,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 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.