| Title |
Euthanasia: Global Scenario and Its Status in India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-017-9946-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Raghvendra Singh Shekhawat, Tanuj Kanchan, Puneet Setia, Alok Atreya, Kewal Krishan |
| Abstract |
The legal and moral validity of euthanasia has been questioned in different situations. In India, the status of euthanasia is no different. It was the Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug case that got significant public attention and led the Supreme Court of India to initiate detailed deliberations on the long ignored issue of euthanasia. Realising the importance of this issue and considering the ongoing and pending litigation before the different courts in this regard, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India issued a public notice on May 2016 that invited opinions from the citizens and the concerned stakeholders on the proposed draft bill entitled The Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill. Globally, only a few countries have legislation with discreet and unambiguous guidelines on euthanasia. The ongoing developments have raised a hope of India getting a discreet law on euthanasia in the future. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 17% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
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 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#726
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,059
of 317,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#26
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 317,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.