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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A survey of patient perspectives on the research use of health information and biospecimens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-016-0130-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stacey A. Page, Kiran Pohar Manhas, Daniel A. Muruve |
| Abstract |
Personal health information and biospecimens are valuable research resources essential for the advancement of medicine and protected by national standards and provincial statutes. Research ethics and privacy standards attempt to balance individual interests with societal interests. However these standards may not reflect public opinion or preferences. The purpose of this study was to assess the opinions and preferences of patients with kidney disease about the use of their health information and biospecimens for medical research. A 45-item survey was distributed to a convenience sample of patients at an outpatient clinic in a large urban centre. The survey briefly addressed sociodemographic and illness characteristics. Opinions were sought on the research use of health information and biospecimens including consent preferences. Two hundred eleven of 400 distributed surveys were completed (response rate 52.8 %). Respondents were generally supportive of medical research and trusting of researchers. Many respondents supported the use of their information and biospecimens for health research and also preferred consent be sought for use of health information and biospecimens. Some supported the use of their information and biospecimens for research without consent. There were significant differences in the opinions people offered regarding the research use of biospecimens compared to health information. Some respondent perspectives about consent were at odds with current regulatory and legal standards. Clinical health data and biospecimens are valuable research resources, critical to the advancement of medicine. Use of these data for research requires balancing respect for individual autonomy, privacy and the societal interest in the greater good. Incongruence between some respondent perspectives and the regulatory standards suggest both a need for public education and review of legislation to increase understanding and ensure the public's trust is maintained. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
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 17 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,868,036
of 23,509,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#719
of 1,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,993
of 346,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#13
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 346,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.