↓ Skip to main content

Why research ethics should add retrospective review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 1,084)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
69 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Why research ethics should add retrospective review
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, October 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12910-019-0399-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angus Dawson, Sapfo Lignou, Chesmal Siriwardhana, Dónal P. O’Mathúna

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 69 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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 40 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 44 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#736,036
of 25,022,483 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#44
of 1,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,279
of 359,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,022,483 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 1,084 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 359,422 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.