You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Human rights and the practice of medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Public Health Reviews, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40985-017-0054-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dainius Pūras |
| Abstract |
There exists a profound disconnect and misunderstanding of the utility of human rights in the practice of medicine that demands urgent attention. The United Nations Special Rapporteur, Dainius Pūras, reflects on his career as a medical professional and why human rights in the day to day care of his patients became a powerful tool to strengthen his practice and ensure the dignity and well-being of those he served. This preface reflects on some of the troubling paradoxes encountered in the practice of medicine, identifying the disconnect between human rights and the provision of patient care as a fundamental struggle that urgently requires a framework for action, much like what is offered by the authors of this special edition. A historical reflection of the power relations between the medical profession and those it serves concludes with a message of hope and a galvanizing call for leadership from within the medical community to lead rights-based reform in patient care. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 6 | 38% |
| United States | 3 | 19% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 4 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 3 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,591,585
of 25,546,214 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reviews
#102
of 279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,588
of 324,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reviews
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,546,214 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 324,933 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.