↓ Skip to main content

Ebola, epidemics, and ethics - what we have learned

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 234)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
31 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
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
Ebola, epidemics, and ethics - what we have learned
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/1747-5341-9-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

G Kevin Donovan

Abstract

The current Ebola epidemic has presented challenges both medical and ethical. Although we have known epidemics of untreatable diseases in the past, this particular one may be unique in the intensity and rapidity of its spread, as well as ethical challenges that it has created, exacerbated by its geographic location. We will look at the infectious agent and the epidemic it is causing, in order to understand the ethical problems that have arisen.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Unknown 105 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 31%
Student > Bachelor 28 26%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 9 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 32%
Social Sciences 14 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 13 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 15 December 2014.
All research outputs
#1,200,784
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#24
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,389
of 274,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 274,199 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 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