↓ Skip to main content

How do case presentation teaching methods affect learning outcomes?-SNAPPS and the One-Minute preceptor

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
How do case presentation teaching methods affect learning outcomes?-SNAPPS and the One-Minute preceptor
Published in
BMC Medical Education, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0531-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masayasu Seki, Junji Otaki, Raoul Breugelmans, Takayuki Komoda, Shizuko Nagata-Kobayashi, Yu Akaishi, Jun Hiramoto, Iwao Ohno, Yoshimi Harada, Yoji Hirayama, Miki Izumi

Abstract

Various techniques have been developed to enable preceptors to teach residents effectively in outpatient settings to promote active learning, including SNAPPS and the One-Minute Preceptor (OMP). This study aimed to ascertain the differences between SNAPPS and the OMP in case presentation content and learner evaluation when used to teach residents about case presentation. From 2011 to 2013, participants were 71 junior clinical residents employed in two hospitals for clinical training. They were randomly allocated to two groups, one using SNAPPS and the other the OMP. From recorded discussions, the "differential diagnoses", "questions and uncertainties", "treatment plans", and "learning issues" were counted. Also, a self-evaluation form was distributed at the end of the study to evaluate the residents' satisfaction with the case presentation. Members of the SNAPPS group used significantly more meaning units related to questions and uncertainties compared with those of the OMP group (P < 0.001). Self-evaluation sheets revealed that members of the SNAPPS group had significantly higher positive responses than those of the OMP group in terms of the following evaluations: "It was easy to bring up questions and uncertainties" (P = 0.046), "It was easy to present the case efficiently" (P = 0.002), "It was easy to present the case in the sequence given" (P = 0.029), and "I was able to give an in-depth case presentation" (P = 0.005). SNAPPS may induce more meaning units related to questions and uncertainties and give more satisfaction to residents than the OMP.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 18 31%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 6 10%

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 30 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,298,305
of 14,202,103 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#849
of 2,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,625
of 336,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,202,103 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,097 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 336,849 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them