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 |
Social values as an independent factor affecting end of life medical decision making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-014-9581-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charles J. Cohen, Yifat Chen, Hedi Orbach, Yossi Freier-Dror, Gail Auslander, Gabriel S. Breuer |
| Abstract |
Research shows that the physician's personal attributes and social characteristics have a strong association with their end-of-life (EOL) decision making. Despite efforts to increase patient, family and surrogate input into EOL decision making, research shows the physician's input to be dominant. Our research finds that physician's social values, independent of religiosity, have a significant association with physician's tendency to withhold or withdraw life sustaining, EOL treatments. It is suggested that physicians employ personal social values in their EOL medical coping, because they have to cope with existential dilemmas posed by the mystery of death, and left unresolved by medical decision making mechanisms such as advanced directives and hospital ethics committees. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 20% |
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Philosophy | 3 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 January 2015.
All research outputs
#17,736,409
of 22,776,824 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#450
of 591 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,467
of 227,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,776,824 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 591 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 227,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.