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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Ethics roundtable debate: should a sedated dying patient be wakened to say goodbye to family?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, June 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc2329 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Batchelor, Leslie Jenal, Farhad Kapadia, Stephen Streat, Leslie Whetstine, Brian Woodcock |
| Abstract |
Intensivists have the potential to maintain vital signs almost indefinitely, but not necessarily the potential to make moribund patients whole. Current ethical and legal mandates push patient autonomy to the forefront of care plans. When patients are incapable of expressing their preferences, surrogates are given proxy. It is unclear how these preferences extend to the very brink of inevitable death. Some say that patients should have the opportunity and authority to direct their death spiral. Others say it would be impossible for them to do so because an inevitable death spiral cannot be effectively palliated. Humane principles dictate they be spared the unrelenting discomfort surrounding death. The present case examines such a patient and the issues surrounding a unique end-of-life decision. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 10 | 28% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,312,846
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,079
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,891
of 54,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 54,027 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 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.