↓ Skip to main content

Last Laughs: Gallows Humor and Medical Education

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Humanities, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
65 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.
Article details
Title
Last Laughs: Gallows Humor and Medical Education
Published in
Journal of Medical Humanities, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10912-015-9338-4
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This paper argues that "backstage" gallows humor among clinical mentors not only affects medical students' perceptions of what it means to be a doctor but is also symptomatic and indicative of a much larger problem in medicine-namely, the failure to attend fully to the complexity and profundity of the lived experiences of illness, suffering, and death. Reorienting the discourse surrounding gallows humor away from whether or in what context it is acceptable and toward the reasons why doctors feel the need to use such humor in the first place addresses this issue in a more illuminating way.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 25%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Psychology 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Philosophy 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,817,226
of 31,849,655 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Humanities
#114
of 441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,859
of 294,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Humanities
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,849,655 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 294,231 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 76% of its contemporaries.
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.