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 |
I’m shocked: informed consent in ECT and the phenomenological-self
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Life Sciences, Society and Policy, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40504-018-0068-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Seniuk |
| Abstract |
This paper argues that phenomenological insights regarding selfhood are relevant to the informed consent process in the treatment of depression using electro-convulsive therapy (ECT). One of the most significant side-effects associated with ECT is retrograde amnesia. Unfortunately, the current informed consent model does not adequately appreciate the full extent in which memory loss disturbs lived-experience. Through the philosophy of Merleau-Ponty, it is possible to appreciate the way in which memory loss affects a person's self-experience, with emphasis given to one's pre-reflective and embodied, relationship with things in the world. This paper aims to demonstrate that proper informed consent should acknowledge the extent to which repeated ECT treatments affect a patient's sense self. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
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 07 November 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#95
of 109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,014
of 446,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Life Sciences, Society and Policy
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 22.5. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 446,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.