↓ Skip to main content

Ethical aspects of sudden cardiac arrest research using observational data: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
32 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Ethical aspects of sudden cardiac arrest research using observational data: a narrative review
Published in
Critical Care, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2153-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marieke A. R. Bak, Marieke T. Blom, Hanno L. Tan, Dick L. Willems

Abstract

Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) accounts for half of all cardiac deaths in Europe. In recent years, large-scale SCA registries have been set up to enable observational studies into risk factors and the effect of treatment approaches. The increasing scale and variety of data sources, coupled with the implementation of a new European data protection legal framework, causes researchers to struggle with how to handle these 'big data'. Data protection in the SCA setting is especially complex since patients become at least temporarily incapacitated, and are thus unable to provide prospective informed consent, and because the majority of patients do not survive. A narrative review employing a systematic literature search was conducted to thematically analyse ethical aspects of non-interventional emergency medicine and critical care research. Although the identified issues may apply to a wider patient population, we describe them within the context of SCA research. Potential harms were found to include: privacy breaches, genetic discrimination and issues associated with the disclosure of individual findings, study design and application of research results. Measures proposed to mitigate harms were: alternative informed consent models including deferred or waived consent and data governance approaches promoting data security, responsible sharing and public engagement. The themes identified in this study may serve as a basis for a much-needed ethical framework regarding research with data from patients with acute and critical illness such as SCA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 4 5%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Computer Science 5 6%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 12 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,481,735
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,301
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,971
of 347,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#41
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 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 done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 347,952 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.