↓ Skip to main content

Human Trafficking in Areas of Conflict: Health Care Professionals’ Duty to Act

Overview of attention for article published in The AMA Journal of Ethic, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Human Trafficking in Areas of Conflict: Health Care Professionals’ Duty to Act
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, January 2017
DOI 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.msoc1-1701
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina Bloem, Rikki E Morris, Makini Chisolm-Straker

Abstract

Given the significant global burden of human trafficking, the ability of clinicians to identify and provide treatment for trafficked persons is critical. Particularly in conflict settings, health care facilities often serve as the first and sometimes only point of contact for trafficked persons. As such, medical practitioners have a unique opportunity and an ethical imperative to intervene, even in nonclinical roles. With proper training, medical practitioners can assist trafficked persons by documenting human trafficking cases, thereby placing pressure on key stakeholders to enforce legal protections, and by providing adequate services to those trafficked.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Social Sciences 4 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 17%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,235,616
of 25,992,468 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,987
of 425,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,992,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 425,695 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.