↓ Skip to main content

The relevance of the Hippocratic Oath to the ethical and moral values of contemporary medicine. Part II: interpretation of the Hippocratic Oath—today’s perspective

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
Title
The relevance of the Hippocratic Oath to the ethical and moral values of contemporary medicine. Part II: interpretation of the Hippocratic Oath—today’s perspective
Published in
European Spine Journal, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00586-018-5615-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Askitopoulou, Antonis N. Vgontzas

Abstract

This is the second part of a paper on the relevance and significance of the Hippocratic Oath to modern medical ethical and moral values with the aim at answering questions on controversial issues related to the Oath. Part I argued that the general attributes and ethical values of the Oath are relevant to the modern world. Part II attempts to elucidate the interpretation of the specific injunctions of the Oath from today's perspective in relation to ethical values concerning the duties of physicians to patients and society. The objective is to prove that the Oath has established the general context of medical ethics of the physician-patient relationship, which reflects long-lasting moral values that still define the medical profession. The Oath has exemplified the fundamental modern ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and confidentiality. Its foremost message focuses on patients' best interests and not on the prohibition of surgery, euthanasia or abortion, as is generally believed. Furthermore, the Oath as a code of professional identity has had a powerful impact on modem judicial opinions regarding medical ethics. In a lot of ways, it is as relevant of the values of contemporary medicine as it was for ancient medicine. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 24%
Student > Master 9 8%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Professor 5 5%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 36 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 35 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,618,203
of 23,063,209 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#2,507
of 4,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,234
of 330,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#38
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,063,209 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 4,684 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 330,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.