| Title |
Thinking ethical and regulatory frameworks in medicine from the perspective of solidarity on both sides of the Atlantic
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11017-016-9390-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara Prainsack, Alena Buyx |
| Abstract |
This article provides a concise overview of the history of scholarship on solidarity in Europe and North America. While recent decades have seen an increase in conceptual and scholarly interest in solidarity in North America and other parts of the Anglo-Saxon world, the concept is much more strongly anchored in Europe. Continental European politics in particular have given rise to two of the most influential traditions of solidarity, namely, socialism and Christian ethics. Solidarity has also guided important public instruments and institutions in Europe (e.g., welfare, healthcare, etc.). Despite the much stronger affinity of continental European societies to solidaristic thinking, we argue that solidarity has much to offer for addressing societal challenges on both sides of the Atlantic and beyond. After proposing a working definition of solidarity that highlights its utility for guiding policy and practice, we give an example of how a solidarity-based perspective can shape instruments for the governance of data use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 7 | 24% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Portugal | 1 | 3% |
| Iceland | 1 | 3% |
| Comoros | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 41% |
| Scientists | 8 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 11 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Philosophy | 3 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Decision Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 05 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,820,702
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#12
of 292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,227
of 419,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 292 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. 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 419,640 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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