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 |
Why have Advance Directives failed in Spain?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-020-00557-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benjamín Herreros, María Benito, Pablo Gella, Emanuele Valenti, Beatriz Sánchez, Tayra Velasco |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 29 | 48% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 30 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 54 | 90% |
| Scientists | 3 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 15% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 16 October 2022.
All research outputs
#791,939
of 24,573,729 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#52
of 1,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,084
of 384,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,573,729 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,058 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 384,246 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 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.