| Title |
Improving the Informed Consent Process for Research Subjects with Low Literacy: A Systematic Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-012-2133-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leonardo Tamariz, Ana Palacio, Mauricio Robert, Erin N. Marcus |
| Abstract |
Inadequate health literacy may impair research subjects' ability to participate adequately in the informed consent (IC) process. Our aim is to evaluate the evidence supporting interventions, to improve comprehension of the IC process in low literacy subjects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Egypt | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 17% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 26% |
| Unknown | 23 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 29% |
| Psychology | 17 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 28 | 18% |
| Unknown | 30 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,468,981
of 25,330,051 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,813
of 8,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,823
of 170,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#16
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,330,051 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,157 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 170,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.