↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

U.S. Medical Schools' Compliance With the Americans with Disabilities Act: Findings From a National Study.

Overview of attention for article published in Academic medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 3,984)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
17 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
42 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
U.S. Medical Schools' Compliance With the Americans with Disabilities Act: Findings From a National Study.
Published in
Academic medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1097/acm.0000000000001087
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zazove, Philip, Case, Benjamin, Moreland, Christopher, Plegue, Melissa A, Hoekstra, Anne, Ouellette, Alicia, Sen, Ananda, Fetters, Michael D, Plegue, Melissa A., Fetters, Michael D., Philip Zazove, Benjamin Case, Christopher Moreland, Melissa A. Plegue, Anne Hoekstra, Alicia Ouellette, Ananda Sen, Michael D. Fetters

Abstract

Physician diversity improves care for underserved populations, yet there are few physicians with disabilities. The authors examined the availability of technical standards (TSs) from U.S. medical schools (MD- and DO-granting) and evaluated these relative to intent to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Document analysis was conducted (2012-2014) on U.S. medical schools' TSs for hearing, visual, and mobility disabilities. Primary outcome measures were ease of obtaining TSs, willingness to provide reasonable accommodations, responsibility for accommodations, and acceptability of intermediaries or auxiliary aids. TSs were available for 161/173 (93%) schools. While 146 (84%) posted these on their Web sites, 100 (58%) were located easily. Few schools, 53 (33%), had TSs specifically supporting accommodating disabilities; 79 (49%) did not clearly state policies, 6 (4%) were unsupportive, and 23 (14%) provided no information. Most schools, 98 (61%), lacked information on responsibility for providing accommodations, 33 (27%) provided accommodations, and 10 (6%) had students assume some responsibility. Approximately 40% allowed auxiliary aids (e.g., motorized scooter), but < 10% allowed intermediaries (e.g., sign language interpreter). Supportive schools were more likely to allow accommodations (P < .001), assume responsibility for accommodations (P < .001), and accept intermediaries (P < .002). DO-granting schools were more supportive for students with mobility disabilities. Most medical school TSs do not support provision of reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities as intended by the ADA. Further study is needed to understand how schools operationalize TSs and barriers to achieving ADA standards.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 50%
Student > Master 4 40%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 30%
Student > Postgraduate 2 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Other 3 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 100%
Psychology 3 30%
Social Sciences 2 20%
Computer Science 1 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 10%
Other 1 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 186. 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 June 2018.
All research outputs
#57,747
of 11,841,246 outputs
Outputs from Academic medicine
#15
of 3,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,834
of 344,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic medicine
#2
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,841,246 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,984 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 344,148 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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 97% of its contemporaries.