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 |
Historical development and current status of organ procurement from death-row prisoners in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-015-0074-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirk C. Allison, Arthur Caplan, Michael E. Shapiro, Charl Els, Norbert W. Paul, Huige Li |
| Abstract |
In December 2014, China announced that only voluntarily donated organs from citizens would be used for transplantation after January 1, 2015. Many medical professionals worldwide believe that China has stopped using organs from death-row prisoners. In the present article, we briefly review the historical development of organ procurement from death-row prisoners in China and comprehensively analyze the social-political background and the legal basis of the announcement. The announcement was not accompanied by any change in organ sourcing legislations or regulations. As a fact, the use of prisoner organs remains legal in China. Even after January 2015, key Chinese transplant officials have repeatedly stated that death-row prisoners have the same right as regular citizens to "voluntarily donate" organs. This perpetuates an unethical organ procurement system in ongoing violation of international standards. Organ sourcing from death-row prisoners has not stopped in China. The 2014 announcement refers to the intention to stop the use of organs illegally harvested without the consent of the prisoners. Prisoner organs procured with "consent" are now simply labelled as "voluntarily donations from citizens". The semantic switch may whitewash sourcing from both death-row prisoners and prisoners of conscience. China can gain credibility only by enacting new legislation prohibiting use of prisoner organs and by making its organ sourcing system open to international inspections. Until international ethical standards are transparently met, sanctions should remain. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 22% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Singapore | 1 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 72% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 16% |
| Scientists | 2 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 41 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 27% |
| Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 27 August 2023.
All research outputs
#551,071
of 25,378,284 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#30
of 1,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,079
of 395,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,101 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 395,290 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.