↓ Skip to main content

Uninformed Origins: Should We Be Advising Parents on the Source of Medicines and Therapies?

Overview of attention for article published in Health Care Analysis, August 2023
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
1 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
Uninformed Origins: Should We Be Advising Parents on the Source of Medicines and Therapies?
Published in
Health Care Analysis, August 2023
DOI 10.1007/s10728-023-00458-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tara E. Ness, Zachary J. Tabb, Janet Malek, Frank X. Placencia

Abstract

Respecting patient autonomy through the process of soliciting informed consent is a cornerstone of clinical ethics. In pediatrics, until a child becomes an adult or legally emancipated, that ethical tenet takes the form of respect for parental decision-making authority. In instances of respecting religious beliefs, doing so is not always apparent and sometimes the challenge lies not only in the healthcare provider's familiarity of religious restrictions but also their knowledge of medical interventions themselves which might conflict with those restrictions. We examine a case of a newborn receiving animal-derived surfactant, a common scenario in neonatology, and present considerations for providers to weigh when confronting when such an intervention might conflict with parent's religious beliefs. We end with strategizing ways to address this issue as a medical community.

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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 100%
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 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#19,029,065
of 24,233,945 outputs
Outputs from Health Care Analysis
#261
of 312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,362
of 188,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Care Analysis
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,233,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 188,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.