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 |
Health, human rights, and the conduct of clinical research within oppressed populations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Globalization and Health, November 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1744-8603-3-10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward J Mills, Sonal Singh |
| Abstract |
Clinical trials evaluating interventions for infectious diseases require enrolling participants that are vulnerable to infection. As clinical trials are conducted in increasingly vulnerable populations, issues of protection of these populations become challenging. In settings where populations are forseeably oppressed, the conduct of research requires considerations that go beyond common ethical concerns and into issues of international human rights law. Using examples of HIV prevention trials in Thailand, hepatitis-E prevention trials in Nepal and malaria therapeutic trials in Burma (Myanmar), we address the inadequacies of current ethical guidelines when conducting research within oppressed populations. We review existing legislature in the United States and United Kingdom that may be used against foreign investigators if trial hardships exist. We conclude by making considerations for research conducted within oppressed populations. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 October 2013.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#910
of 1,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,385
of 90,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 90,952 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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. This one has scored higher than all of them