| Title |
The impact of caring for dying patients in intensive care units on a physician’s personhood: a systematic scoping review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13010-020-00096-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joshua Tze Yin Kuek, Lisa Xin Ling Ngiam, Nur Haidah Ahmad Kamal, Jeng Long Chia, Natalie Pei Xin Chan, Ahmad Bin Hanifah Marican Abdurrahman, Chong Yao Ho, Lorraine Hui En Tan, Jun Leng Goh, Michelle Shi Qing Khoo, Yun Ting Ong, Min Chiam, Annelissa Mien Chew Chin, Stephen Mason, Lalit Kumar Radha Krishna |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 144 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 16% |
| Unknown | 55 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 39 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 10% |
| Unknown | 55 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 December 2020.
All research outputs
#14,033,993
of 23,263,851 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#170
of 219 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,300
of 508,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,263,851 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 219 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 508,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them