| Title |
Emerging Ethical, Legal and Social Issues Associated with Stem Cell Research & and the Current Role of the Moral Status of the Embryo
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, May 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12015-009-9062-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amy Zarzeczny, Timothy Caulfield |
| Abstract |
Since its early days, stem cell research, particularly human embryonic stem cell research, has been the focus of intense social debate, and the question of the moral status of the embryo has been a central issue in the controversy. Despite this friction, and while it has yet to obtain widespread success in clinical applications, stem cell research remains a great hope for future advances in healthcare. In this paper, we will discuss the results of our systematic literature review in which we examined recent social science, legal and biomedical discourse, as well as Canadian print media discourse, associated with stem cell research in order to assess the role the question of the moral status of the embryo currently plays in these forums, and to identify what other issues are emerging and receiving attention. This analysis will assist with recognizing the issues which are likely to inform future policy and will facilitate forecasting the probable direction of the continually developing social discourse surrounding stem cell research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 60% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 20% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 19 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 December 2014.
All research outputs
#14,784,344
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#542
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,261
of 102,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 102,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.