↓ Skip to main content

Ethical Concepts and Future Challenges of Neuroimaging: An Islamic Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Ethical Concepts and Future Challenges of Neuroimaging: An Islamic Perspective
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, August 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11948-012-9386-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wael K. Al-Delaimy

Abstract

Neuroscience is advancing at a rapid pace, with new technologies and approaches that are creating ethical challenges not easily addressed by current ethical frameworks and guidelines. One fascinating technology is neuroimaging, especially functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Although still in its infancy, fMRI is breaking new ground in neuroscience, potentially offering increased understanding of brain function. Different populations and faith traditions will likely have different reactions to these new technologies and the ethical challenges they bring with them. Muslims are approximately one-fifth of world population and they have a specific and highly regulated ethical and moral code, which helps them deal with scientific advances and decision making processes in an Islamically ethical manner. From this ethical perspective, in light of the relevant tenets of Islam, neuroimaging poses various challenges. The privacy of spirituality and the thought process, the requirement to put community interest before individual interest, and emphasis on conscious confession in legal situations are Islamic concepts that can pose a challenge for the use of something intrusive such as an fMRI. Muslim moral concepts such as There shall be no harm inflicted or reciprocated in Islam and Necessities overrule prohibitions are some of the criteria that might appropriately be used to guide advancing neuroscience. Neuroscientists should be particularly prudent and well prepared in implementing neuroscience advances that are breaking new scientific and ethical ground. Neuroscientists should also be prepared to assist in setting the ethical frameworks in place in advance of what might be perceived as runaway applications of technology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 5%
Malaysia 1 3%
Unknown 34 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 6 16%
Social Sciences 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#4,437,197
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#333
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,818
of 167,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 167,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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.