↓ Skip to main content

Performance of a core of transversal skills: self-perceptions of undergraduate medical students

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Performance of a core of transversal skills: self-perceptions of undergraduate medical students
Published in
BMC Medical Education, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0527-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Ribeiro, Milton Severo, Maria Amélia Ferreira

Abstract

There is an increasingly growing trend towards integrating scientific research training into undergraduate medical education. Communication, research and organisational/learning skills are core competences acquired by scientific research activity. The aim of this study was to assess the perceived performance of a core of transversal skills, related with scientific research, by Portuguese medical students. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 611 Portuguese students attending the first, fourth and sixth years of the medical course, during the same academic year. A validated questionnaire was applied for this purpose. Medical students felt confident regarding the majority of the analyzed transversal skills, particularly regarding team work capacity (72.7 % perceived their own capacity as good). On the other hand, the perceived ability to manage information technology, time and to search literature was classified only as sufficient by many of them. The progression over the medical course and participation in research activities were associated with an increasing odds of a good perceived performance of skills such as writing skills (research activity: OR = 2.00; 95 % CI: 1.34-2.97) and English proficiency (research activity: OR = 1.59; 95 % CI: 1.06-2.38/final year medical students: OR = 3.63; 95 % CI: 2.42-5.45). In this line, the early exposure to research activities along undergraduate medical education is an added value for students and the implementation of an integrated research program on medical curriculum should be considered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 18%
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 11 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 5 5%
Professor 4 4%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 30 32%
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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,302,535
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#3,144
of 3,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#332,528
of 395,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#72
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 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 3,323 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 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 395,862 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 80 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.