↓ Skip to main content

Proposing and developing a National Institute for Forensic Toxicology in Ireland - transformation through education

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Proposing and developing a National Institute for Forensic Toxicology in Ireland - transformation through education
Published in
SpringerPlus, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-2-360
Pubmed ID
Authors

William P Tormey

Abstract

Toxicology for coroners is an important minority service whose quality is central to the validity and integrity of the death certification system. Multidisciplinary case conferences are routine practice in the major medical specialties. In conventional practice for the coroners' courts, the dissecting pathologist is often relied upon to interpret toxicological data usually without specialist training. In Ireland the service is fragmented and there is at present no medically trained toxicologist directly involved in the direction or reporting of cases even where multiple drugs are found in blood at various levels and drug-drug interaction may be possible or likely. To encourage both medical professionals and political administration to confront the issues, the education literature on action research and critical incident methodology is reviewed to develop a strategy for change in this service. An example of action research being applied to medicine is used as an indicator that an action research template could be used to advocate for a new National Institute for Forensic Toxicology in Ireland. The main participant groups are identified and the development cycle outlined.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Other 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Unknown 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 2 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Social Sciences 2 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 August 2013.
All research outputs
#14,175,799
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#770
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,493
of 198,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#35
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 198,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.