↓ Skip to main content

Sufficient blood, safe blood: can we have both?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Sufficient blood, safe blood: can we have both?
Published in
BMC Medicine, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Halvard Bönig, Michael Schmidt, Kai Hourfar, Jörg Schüttrumpf, Erhard Seifried

Abstract

The decision in September 2011 in the UK to accept blood donations from non-practicing men who have sex with men (MSM) has received significant public attention. Will this rule change substantially boost the number of blood donations or will it make our blood less safe? Clearly, most European countries have a blood procurement problem. Fewer young people are donating, while the population is aging and more invasive therapies are requiring more blood. Yet if that was the reason for allowing non-practicing MSM to donate, clearly re-admission of some other, much larger populations that are currently deferred from donation should likewise be considered. As far as risks for blood safety are concerned, evidence has been provided that the current quality of infectious disease marker testing significantly mitigates against, although does not completely eradicate, risks associated with admission of donors with a high risk of carrying certain blood-transmissible agents. However, it could be argued that more effective recruitment of the non-donor pool, which is substantially larger than the group of currently ineligible donors, would be a better strategy. Recruitment of this group will benefit the availability of blood without jeopardizing the current excellent safety profile of blood.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Nigeria 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 54 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 22%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 17%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 19 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 May 2012.
All research outputs
#12,661,002
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,670
of 3,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,654
of 160,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#24
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 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 3,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 160,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.