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.
Timeline
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
Clinicians’ Obligations to Use Qualified Medical Interpreters When Caring for Patients with Limited English Proficiency
|
---|---|
Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, March 2017
|
DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.3.ecas2-1703 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gaurab Basu, Vonessa Phillips Costa, Priyank Jain |
Abstract |
Access to language services is a required and foundational component of care for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). National standards for medical interpreting set by the US Department of Health and Human Services and by the National Council on Interpreting in Health Care establish the role of qualified medical interpreters in the provision of care in the United States. In the vignette, the attending physician infringes upon the patient's right to appropriate language services and renders unethical care. Clinicians are obliged to create systems and a culture that ensure quality care for patients with LEP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 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.
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.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 50 | 57% |
Canada | 6 | 7% |
Mexico | 3 | 3% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
Comoros | 1 | 1% |
Germany | 1 | 1% |
Turkey | 1 | 1% |
New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
Sweden | 1 | 1% |
Other | 6 | 7% |
Unknown | 16 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 59 | 67% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 15% |
Scientists | 13 | 15% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 16 | 17% |
Researcher | 11 | 11% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
Other | 19 | 20% |
Unknown | 29 | 30% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 27% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 15% |
Social Sciences | 8 | 8% |
Arts and Humanities | 5 | 5% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
Other | 8 | 8% |
Unknown | 31 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 115. 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 31 August 2024.
All research outputs
#394,421
of 26,742,580 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#112
of 2,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,957
of 329,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#4
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,742,580 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,833 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 329,759 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 97% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.