↓ Skip to main content

CRIANÇAS COM MÚLTIPLAS MALFORMAÇÕES CONGÊNITAS: QUAIS SÃO OS LIMITES ENTRE OBSTINAÇÃO TERAPÊUTICA E TRATAMENTO DE BENEFÍCIO DUVIDOSO?

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Paulista de Pediatria, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
CRIANÇAS COM MÚLTIPLAS MALFORMAÇÕES CONGÊNITAS: QUAIS SÃO OS LIMITES ENTRE OBSTINAÇÃO TERAPÊUTICA E TRATAMENTO DE BENEFÍCIO DUVIDOSO?
Published in
Revista Paulista de Pediatria, February 2017
DOI 10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;1;00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Souza Valle Cardoso Pastura, Marcelo Gerardin Poirot Land

Abstract

Therapeutic approach of children with multiple malformations poses many dilemmas, making it difficult to build a line between the treatment of uncertain benefit and therapeutic obstinacy. The aim of this paper was to highlight possible sources of uncertainty in the decision-making process, for this group of children. An 11-month-old boy, born with multiple birth defects and abandoned by his parents, has never been discharged home. He has complex congenital heart disease, main left bronchus stenosis and imperforate anus. He is under technological support and has gone through many surgical procedures. The complete correction of the cardiac defect seems unlikely, and every attempt to wean the ventilator has failed. The first two main sources of uncertainty in the management of children with multiple birth defects are related to an uncertain prognosis. There is a lack of empirical data, due to the multiple possibilities of anatomic or functional organ involvement, with few similar cases described. Prognosis is also unpredictable for neuro-developmental evolution, as well as the capacity for the development and regeneration of other organs. Another source of uncertainty is how to qualify the present and future life as worth living, by weighing the costs and benefits. The fourth source of uncertainty is who has the decision: physicians or parents? Finally, if a treatment is defined futile then, how to limit support? No single framework exists to help these delicate decision-making processes. We propose, then, that physicians should be committed to develop their own perception skills in order to understand patient's manifestations of needs and family values.

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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 10 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Unspecified 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 37%
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 30 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#145
of 511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,353
of 323,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 511 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 323,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.