文章摘要
田金徽,赖玖连,贾娟,邢丽娜,宋旭萍,李加忠,沈明辉,沈明辉*.医学“课程思政”作者研究能力和团队特征分析[J].中国医药导刊,2019,21(7):442-446.
医学“课程思政”作者研究能力和团队特征分析
Analysis of Authors Research Ability and Team Characteristics of Curriculum Ideological and Political Education in Medical Teaching
投稿时间:2019-07-08  修订日期:2019-07-08
DOI:
中文关键词: 课程思政  研究能力  团队特征
英文关键词: Curriculum ideological and political education  Research ability  Team characteristics
基金项目:兰州大学2015教学研究项目(项目编号:201525;项目名称:本科教学中“任务驱动”项目教学法的研究与实践—以循证医学课程为例 );兰州大学2017教学研究项目(项目编号:2017047;项目名称:基础医学本科教学学生评教模式改革与探索)
作者单位E-mail
田金徽 兰州大学循证医学中心 tjh996@163.com 
赖玖连 兰州大学公共卫生学院  
贾娟 中国人民解放军总医院第三医学中心  
邢丽娜 兰州大学循证医学中心 兰州大学基础医学院  
宋旭萍 兰州大学公共卫生学院  
李加忠 兰州大学药学院  
沈明辉 The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University  
沈明辉*   
摘要点击次数: 69
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的:分析我国医学“课程思政”作者研究能力和团队特征分析研究的现状,以期为国内研究者提供借鉴与参考。方法:计算机检索主要中文数据库获取“课程思政”研究。采用书目共现分析系统(BICOMS-2) 软件对纳入研究的年代、作者及其研究机构和省份等信息进行提取,利用NetDraw绘制作者、研究机构和省份网络社会关系图。结果:共纳入42篇“课程思政”研究,发文最多的省份是上海,研究机构是上海健康医学院,143位作者参与了研究的发表,126个作者形成25个研究团队,但各省份之间、机构之间合作较少。结论:“课程思政”研究存在省份和研究机构的不平衡性,高产作者相对极少,且研究内容相对分散。
英文摘要:
      Objective: To analyze the author research ability and team characteristics of curriculum ideological and political education in medical teaching,and to provide reference for the researchers in China. Methods: We searched the main Chinese databases to obtain the research of curriculum ideological and political education in medical teaching. The bibliographic item co-occurrence mining system(BICOMS-2) software was used to extract and analyze the related information such as publication year, researchers, institutions, and provinces. The NetDraw software was used to produce the network of researchers, institutions, and provinces. Results: A total of 49 researches of curriculum ideological and political education in medical teaching, the most productive province and institution was Shanghai and Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, respectively.143 authors participated in the publication of the researches, 126 authors formed 25 cooperative groups, but there was less cooperation among the authors and institutions. Conclusion:There was serious imbalance in the number of the distribution of authors and institutions, there were few authors with high yields, and the subject of the study is rather limited.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器