| Title |
Interventions for improving medical students' interpersonal communication in medical consultations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012418.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Conor Gilligan, Martine Powell, Marita C Lynagh, Bernadette M Ward, Chris Lonsdale, Pam Harvey, Erica L James, Dominique Rich, Sari P Dewi, Smriti Nepal, Hayley A Croft, Jonathan Silverman |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 102 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 Kingdom | 22 | 22% |
| Australia | 14 | 14% |
| United States | 6 | 6% |
| Spain | 5 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 2 | 2% |
| Nepal | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 40 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 60 | 59% |
| Scientists | 19 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 19 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 316 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 6% |
| Researcher | 16 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 13% |
| Unknown | 172 | 54% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 9% |
| Psychology | 16 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 39 | 12% |
| Unknown | 178 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 27 September 2023.
All research outputs
#574,724
of 24,698,221 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,059
of 12,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,309
of 524,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,698,221 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 524,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.