↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Universal Health Literacy Precautions in Minimizing “Medspeak” and Promoting Shared Decision Making

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
96 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
The Role of Universal Health Literacy Precautions in Minimizing “Medspeak” and Promoting Shared Decision Making
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, March 2017
DOI 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.3.pfor1-1703
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lara Killian, Margo Coletti

Abstract

Shared decision making (SDM), a collaborative process whereby patients and professionals make health care decisions together, is a cornerstone of ethical patient care. The patient-clinician communication necessary to achieve SDM depends on many factors, not the least of which is a shared language (sometimes with the aid of a medical interpreter). However, even when a patient and clinician are speaking the same mother tongue, the use of medical jargon can pose a large and unnecessary barrier. This article discusses how health care professionals can use "universal health literacy precautions" as a legal, practical, and ethical means to enhance SDM and improve health care outcomes.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 7 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 33%
Social Sciences 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 14 April 2023.
All research outputs
#572,012
of 26,446,252 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#138
of 2,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,497
of 328,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#7
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,446,252 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 328,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.