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 |
How is organ transplantation depicted in internal medicine and transplantation journals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6939-14-39 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Céline Durand, Andrée Duplantie, Yves Chabot, Hubert Doucet, Marie-Chantal Fortin |
| Abstract |
In their book Spare Parts, published in 1992, Fox and Swazey criticized various aspects of organ transplantation, including the routinization of the procedure, ignorance regarding its inherent uncertainties, and the ethos of transplant professionals. Using this work as a frame of reference, we analyzed articles on organ transplantation published in internal medicine and transplantation journals between 1995 and 2008 to see whether Fox and Swazey's critiques of organ transplantation were still relevant. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 20% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 23% |
| Psychology | 3 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 October 2013.
All research outputs
#21,264,673
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#971
of 1,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,185
of 210,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 210,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.