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 |
Ethics challenges and guidance related to research involving adolescent post-abortion care: a scoping review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Health, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12978-018-0515-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph M. Zulu, Joseph Ali, Kristina Hallez, Nancy Kass, Charles Michelo, Adnan A. Hyder |
| Abstract |
An increase in post abortion care (PAC) research with adolescents, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, has brought to attention several associated research ethics challenges. In order to better understand the ethics context of PAC research with adolescents, we conducted a scoping review of published literature. Following a systematic search of PubMed, HINARI, and Google Scholar, we analysed articles meeting inclusion criteria to determine common themes across both the ethical challenges related to PAC research with adolescents and any available guidance on the identified challenges. The literature search identified an initial 3321 records of which 14 were included in analysis following screening. Several ethical challenges stem from abortion being a controversial, sensitive, and stigmatized topic in many settings. Ethical dilemmas experienced by researchers conducting adolescent PAC research included: difficulties in convincing local health providers to permit PAC research; challenges in recruiting and seeking consent due to sensitivity of the subject; effectively protecting confidentiality; managing negative effects of interventions; creating a non-prejudicial atmosphere for research; managing emotional issues among adolescents; and dealing with uncertainty regarding the role of researchers when observing unethical health care practices. Suggested strategies for addressing some of these challenges include: using several sources to recruit study participants, using research to facilitate dialogue on abortion, briefing health workers on any observed unethical practices after data collection, fostering a comprehensive understanding of contextual norms and values, selecting staff with experience working with study populations, and avoiding collection of personal identifiers. Addressing ethical challenges that researchers face when conducting PAC research with adolescents requires guidance at the individual, institutional, community, and international levels. Overall, despite the documentation of challenges in the published literature, guidance on handling several of these ethics challenges is sparse. We encourage further research to clarify the identified challenges and support the development of formal guidance in this area. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 States | 3 | 43% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 41 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 43 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 October 2018.
All research outputs
#6,983,759
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#792
of 1,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,515
of 326,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#34
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 326,328 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.