You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The relevance of the Goudge inquiry to the practice of child protection/forensic paediatrics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Forensic & Legal Medicine, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jflm.2014.07.009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine Skellern, Terence Donald |
| Abstract |
In 2008 Ontario, Canada the Goudge Inquiry arose following increasing concerns about practices surrounding forensic pathology and the investigation of paediatric deaths. Some of the considerations and recommendations have relevance to child protection/forensic paediatricians, particularly in relation to their responsibilities in opinion formulation and as expert witnesses. By examining the Inquiry recommendations, this paper applies them in relation to child protection/forensic paediatrics by discussing forensic medicine and its legal context, how interpretation of published reports and data should be used in opinion formulation; issues of 'diagnosis' versus 'opinion'; issues specific to child protection paediatrics; quality control; aspects of report writing and terminological considerations. It concludes with an adaptation of key recommendations directly from those of Goudge, applied to the context of paediatric forensic medicine undertaken in child protection assessments. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 22% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 11% |
| Psychology | 2 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 January 2015.
All research outputs
#8,630,273
of 25,632,496 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Forensic & Legal Medicine
#352
of 1,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,022
of 243,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Forensic & Legal Medicine
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,632,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 243,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
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 7 of them.