↓ Skip to main content

Assaults by Mentally Disordered Offenders in Prison: Equity and Equivalence

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
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.
Title
Assaults by Mentally Disordered Offenders in Prison: Equity and Equivalence
Published in
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11673-016-9698-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heidi Hales, Amy Dixon, Zoe Newton, Annie Bartlett

Abstract

Managing the violent behaviour of mentally disordered offenders (MDO) is challenging in all jurisdictions. We describe the ethical framework and practical management of MDOs in England and Wales in the context of the move to equivalence of healthcare between hospital and prison. We consider the similarities and differences between prison and hospital management of the violent and challenging behaviours of MDOs. We argue that both types of institution can learn from each other and that equivalence of care should extend to equivalence of criminal proceedings in court and prisons for MDOs. We argue that any adjudication process in prison for MDOs is enhanced by the relevant involvement of mental health professionals and the articulation of the ethical principles underpinning health and criminal justice practices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 5 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Psychology 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,246,461
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#388
of 599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,446
of 392,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 392,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.