↓ Skip to main content

Ethical aspects of diagnosis and interventions for children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) and their families

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, January 2018
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 (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Ethical aspects of diagnosis and interventions for children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) and their families
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12910-017-0242-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gert Helgesson, Göran Bertilsson, Helena Domeij, Gunilla Fahlström, Emelie Heintz, Anders Hjern, Christina Nehlin Gordh, Viviann Nordin, Jenny Rangmar, Ann-Margret Rydell, Viveka Sundelin Wahlsten, Monica Hultcrantz

Abstract

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) is an umbrella term covering several conditions for which alcohol consumption during pregnancy is taken to play a causal role. The benefit of individuals being identified with a condition within FASD remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to identify ethical aspects and consequences of diagnostics, interventions, and family support in relation to FASD. Ethical aspects relating to diagnostics, interventions, and family support regarding FASD were compiled and discussed, drawing on a series of discussions with experts in the field, published literature, and medical ethicists. Several advantages and disadvantages in regards of obtaining a diagnosis or description of the condition were identified. For instance, it provides an explanation and potential preparedness for not yet encountered difficulties, which may play an essential role in acquiring much needed help and support from health care, school, and the social services. There are no interventions specifically evaluated for FASD conditions, but training programs and family support for conditions with symptoms overlapping with FASD, e.g. ADHD, autism, and intellectual disability, are likely to be relevant. Stigmatization, blame, and guilt are potential downsides. There might also be unfortunate prioritization if individuals with equal needs are treated differently depending on whether or not they meet the criteria for a specific condition. The value for the concerned individuals of obtaining a FASD-related description of their condition - for instance, in terms of wellbeing - is not established. Nor is it established that allocating resources based on whether individuals fulfil FASD-related criteria is justified, compared to allocations directed to the most prominent specific needs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 21%
Student > Master 14 17%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 20%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#1,390,233
of 15,398,206 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#156
of 677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,095
of 405,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#20
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,398,206 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 677 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 405,718 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 70% of its contemporaries.