↓ Skip to main content

Educating future nursing scientists: Recommendations for integrating omics content in PhD programs

Overview of attention for article published in Nursing Outlook, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Educating future nursing scientists: Recommendations for integrating omics content in PhD programs
Published in
Nursing Outlook, July 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.outlook.2015.06.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvette P. Conley, Margaret Heitkemper, Donna McCarthy, Cindy M. Anderson, Elizabeth J. Corwin, Sandra Daack-Hirsch, Susan G. Dorsey, Katherine E. Gregory, Maureen W. Groer, Susan J. Henly, Timothy Landers, Debra E. Lyon, Jacquelyn Y. Taylor, Joachim Voss

Abstract

Preparing the next generation of nursing scientists to conduct high-impact, competitive, sustainable, innovative, and interdisciplinary programs of research requires that the curricula for PhD programs keep pace with emerging areas of knowledge and health care/biomedical science. A field of inquiry that holds great potential to influence our understanding of the underlying biology and mechanisms of health and disease is omics. For the purpose of this article, omics refers to genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, epigenomics, exposomics, microbiomics, and metabolomics. Traditionally, most PhD programs in schools of nursing do not incorporate this content into their core curricula. As part of the Council for the Advancement of Nursing Science's Idea Festival for Nursing Science Education, a work group charged with addressing omics preparation for the next generation of nursing scientists was convened. The purpose of this article is to describe key findings and recommendations from the work group that unanimously and enthusiastically support the incorporation of omics content into the curricula of PhD programs in nursing. The work group also calls to action faculty in schools of nursing to develop strategies to enable students needing immersion in omics science and methods to execute their research goals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 13%
Researcher 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Librarian 4 7%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,351,531
of 14,579,947 outputs
Outputs from Nursing Outlook
#124
of 632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,568
of 234,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nursing Outlook
#4
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,579,947 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 234,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.