↓ Skip to main content

Medical ward round competence in internal medicine – an interview study towards an interprofessional development of an Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA)

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
Medical ward round competence in internal medicine – an interview study towards an interprofessional development of an Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA)
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0697-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Teresa Wölfel, Esther Beltermann, Christian Lottspeich, Elisa Vietz, Martin R. Fischer, Ralf Schmidmaier

Abstract

The medical ward round is a central but complex activity that is of relevance from the first day of work. However, difficulties for young doctors have been reported. Instruction of ward round competence in medical curricula is hampered by the lack of a standardized description of the procedure. This paper aims to identify and describe physicians' tasks and relevant competences for conducting a medical ward round on the first day of professional work. A review of recent literature revealed known important aspects of medical ward rounds. These were used for the development of a semi-structured interview schedule. Medical ward round experts working at different hospitals were interviewed. The sample consisted of 14 ward physicians (M = 8.82 years of work experience) and 12 nurses (M = 14.55 years of work experience) working in different specializations of internal medicine. All interviews were audiotaped, fully transcribed, and analyzed using an inductive-deductive coding scheme. Nine fields of competences with 18 related sub-competences and 62 observable tasks were identified as relevant for conducting a medical ward round. Over 70 % of the experts named communication, collaborative clinical reasoning and organization as essential competences. Deeper analysis further unveiled the importance of self-management, management of difficult situations, error management and teamwork. The study is the first to picture ward round competences and related tasks in detail and to define an EPA "Conducting an internal medicine ward round" based on systematic interprofessional expert interviews. It thus provides a basis for integration of ward round competences in the medical curricula in an evidence based manner and gives a framework for the development of instructional intervention studies and comparative studies in other medical fields.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 110 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 14%
Other 8 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Researcher 7 6%
Lecturer 7 6%
Other 36 32%
Unknown 30 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Unspecified 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 37 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,392,183
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,084
of 3,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,818
of 354,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#26
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 354,317 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 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 59% of its contemporaries.