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 |
The best interests of the child and the return of results in genetic research: international comparative perspectives
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, October 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6939-15-72 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ma’n H Zawati, David Parry, Bartha Maria Knoppers |
Abstract |
Paediatric genomic research raises particularly challenging questions on whether and under what circumstances to return research results. In the paediatric context, decision-making is guided by the best interests of the child framework, as enshrined in the 1989 international Convention on the Rights of the Child. According to this Convention, rights and responsibilities are shared between children, parents, researchers, and the state. These "relational" obligations are further complicated in the context of genetic research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | 25% |
Japan | 1 | 25% |
Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
United States | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 50 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
Researcher | 6 | 12% |
Lecturer | 4 | 8% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 8% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
Other | 15 | 29% |
Unknown | 12 | 23% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Social Sciences | 9 | 17% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 10% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
Other | 10 | 19% |
Unknown | 16 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 October 2014.
All research outputs
#13,180,774
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#683
of 991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,269
of 254,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 254,034 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.