↓ Skip to main content

Understanding how residents’ preferences for supervisory methods change throughout residency training: a mixed-methods study

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Understanding how residents’ preferences for supervisory methods change throughout residency training: a mixed-methods study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0462-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francisco Olmos-Vega, Diana Dolmans, Jeroen Donkers, Renée E. Stalmeijer

Abstract

A major challenge for clinical supervisors is to encourage their residents to be independent without jeopardising patient safety. Residents' preferences according to level of training on this regard have not been completely explored. This study has sought to investigate which teaching methods of the Cognitive Apprenticeship (CA) model junior, intermediate and senior residents preferred and why, and how these preferences differed between groups. We invited 301 residents of all residency programmes of Javeriana University, Bogotá, Colombia, to participate. Each resident was asked to complete a Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ), which, being based on the teaching methods of CA, asked residents to rate the importance to their learning of each teaching method and to indicate which of these they preferred the most and why. A total of 215 residents (71 %) completed the questionnaire. All concurred that all CA teaching methods were important or very important to their learning, regardless of their level of training. However, the reasons for their preferences clearly differed between groups: junior and intermediate residents preferred teaching methods that were more supervisor-directed, such as modelling and coaching, whereas senior residents preferred teaching methods that were more resident-directed, such as exploration and articulation. The results indicate that clinical supervision (CS) should accommodate to residents' varying degrees of development by attuning the configuration of CA teaching methods to each level of residency training. This configuration should initially vest more power in the supervisor, and gradually let the resident take charge, without ever discontinuing CS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 8%
Professor 8 8%
Other 31 33%
Unknown 22 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 43%
Social Sciences 11 12%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 22 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#5,339,430
of 25,123,616 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#971
of 3,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,954
of 286,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#18
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,123,616 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,910 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 75% 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 286,326 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.