| Title |
Clinical Ethics Committees in Africa: lost in the shadow of RECs/IRBs?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-020-00559-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keymanthri Moodley, Siti Mukaumbya Kabanda, Leza Soldaat, Anita Kleinsmidt, Adetayo Emmanuel Obasa, Sharon Kling |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 5 | 42% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 58% |
| Scientists | 3 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Librarian | 4 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 31 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#3,917,251
of 24,282,284 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#396
of 1,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,255
of 514,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,282,284 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 514,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 65% of its contemporaries.