↓ Skip to main content

Reassessing the approach to informed consent: the case of unrelated hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in adult thalassemia patients

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 176)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Reassessing the approach to informed consent: the case of unrelated hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in adult thalassemia patients
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1747-5341-9-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salvatore Pisu, Giovanni Caocci, Ernesto d’Aloja, Fabio Efficace, Adriana Vacca, Eugenia Piras, Maria Orofino, Carmen Addari, Michela Pintor, Roberto Demontis, Federica Demuru, Maria Pittau, Gary S Collins, Giorgio La Nasa

Abstract

The informed consent process is the legal embodiment of the fundamental right of the individual to make decisions affecting his or her health., and the patient's permission is a crucial form of respect of freedom and dignity, it becomes extremely important to enhance the patient's understanding and recall of the information given by the physician. This statement acquires additional weight when the medical treatment proposed can potentially be detrimental or even fatal. This is the case of thalassemia patients pertaining to class 3 of the Pesaro classification where Allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) remains the only potentially curative treatment. Unfortunately, this kind of intervention is burdened by an elevated transplantation-related mortality risk (TRM: all deaths considered related to transplantation), equal to 30% according to published reports. In thalassemia, the role of the patient in the informed consent process leading up to HSCT has not been fully investigated. This study investigated the hypothesis that information provided by physicians in the medical scenario of HSCT is not fully understood by patients and that misunderstanding and communication biases may affect the clinical decision-making process.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Psychology 7 16%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Philosophy 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 5 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 16 February 2015.
All research outputs
#703,595
of 12,430,577 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#25
of 176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,656
of 195,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,430,577 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 195,920 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them