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 |
Evaluation of an online training program in eating disorders for health professionals in Australia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Eating Disorders, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40337-015-0078-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rachel S. Brownlow, Sarah Maguire, Adrienne O’Dell, Catia Dias-da-Costa, Stephen Touyz, Janice Russell |
| Abstract |
Early detection and treatment of eating disorders is instrumental in positive health outcomes for this serious public health concern. As such, workforce development in screening, diagnosis and early treatment of eating disorders is needed. Research has demonstrated both high rates of failure to accurately diagnose and treat cases early and low levels of perceived access to training in eating disorders by health professionals-representing an urgent need for clinician training in this area. However, significant barriers to the access of evidence-based training programs exist, including availability, cost and time, particularly when large geographic distances are involved. Online learning presents a solution to workforce challenges, as it can be delivered anywhere, at a fraction of the cost of traditional training, timing is user controlled, and a growing body of research is demonstrating it as effective as face-to-face training. The Centre for Eating and Dieting Disorders in Australia has developed an Online Training Program In Eating Disorders, to educate health professionals in the nature, identification, assessment and management of eating disorders. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the ability of this online learning course to improve clinician levels of knowledge, skill and confidence to treat eating disorders. As well as its effect on stigmatised beliefs about eating disorders known to effect treatment delivery. One-hundred-eighty-seven health professionals participated in the program. A pre training questionnaire and a post training evaluation examined participants' levels of knowledge, skill and confidence to treat eating disorders, as well attitudes and beliefs about people with eating disorders. Significant improvements in knowledge, skill, and confidence to treat eating disorders was found between pre and post program assessment in health professionals who completed the course, along with a significant decrease in stigmatised beliefs about eating disorders. The results of this study demonstrated that the online training program was an effective tool in increasing health professionals' level of knowledge, skill and confidence to treat people with eating disorders. The results also demonstrated that online training reduced health professionals' personal bias towards people with eating disorders. Limitations of this study include the use of self-report measures rather than observation of the health professional in clinical practice. As a result, it is not possible to make determinations regarding the translation of these results to clinical settings. The findings of this study suggest that online training programs may present an innovative solution to the considerable workforce development challenges faced by clinicians needing training in eating disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 2 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Greece | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 28 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#12,930,646
of 23,313,051 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Eating Disorders
#540
of 828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,692
of 286,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Eating Disorders
#16
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,313,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 828 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 286,892 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.