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 evolution of withdrawal: negotiating research relationships in biobanking
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40504-014-0016-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen Melham, Linda Briceno Moraia, Colin Mitchell, Michael Morrison, Harriet Teare, Jane Kaye |
| Abstract |
The right to withdraw from research, along with the necessity of adequately informed consent, is at the heart of the post-Nuremburg code of ethical safeguards in biomedical research on human participants. As biomedical research moves away from direct interventional studies towards research using networks of linked human tissue samples and data, however, questions arise about what withdrawal can and should mean in these new contexts. Some of the more expansive traditional understandings, such as the right to withdraw from a study 'at any time' are limited in practice by the nature of biobank- supported research, particularly where it makes possible widespread dissemination and ongoing reuse of data. It is time for a more nuanced, granular arrangement for withdrawal, appropriate to the ongoing relationships between participants and long-term biobanking enterprises. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 3 | 20% |
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 73% |
| Scientists | 3 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 12 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 44% |
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 09 October 2014.
All research outputs
#3,090,789
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#39
of 109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,645
of 254,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 254,236 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.