| Title |
Trouble in the Gap: A Bioethical and Sociological Analysis of Informed Consent for High-Risk Medical Procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11673-012-9414-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher F. C. Jordens, Kathleen Montgomery, Rowena Forsyth |
| Abstract |
Concerns are frequently raised about the extent to which formal consent procedures actually lead to "informed" consent. As part of a study of consent to high-risk medical procedures, we analyzed in-depth interviews with 16 health care professionals working in bone-marrow transplantation in Sydney, Australia. We find that these professionals recognize and act on their responsibility to inform and educate patients and that they expect patients to reciprocate these efforts by demonstrably engaging in the education process. This expectation is largely implicit, however, and when it is not met, this can give rise to trouble that can have adverse consequences for patients, physicians, and relationships within the clinic. We revisit the concept of the sick role to formalize this new role expectation, and we argue that "informed" consent is a process that is usually incomplete, despite trappings and assumptions that help to create the illusion of completeness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 22% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 7 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 March 2013.
All research outputs
#18,332,122
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#518
of 594 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,969
of 280,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 594 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 280,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.