↓ Skip to main content

Ethical considerations in prehospital ambulance based research: qualitative interview study of expert informants

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, November 2019
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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 considerations in prehospital ambulance based research: qualitative interview study of expert informants
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, November 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12910-019-0425-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Armstrong, Adele Langlois, Niroshan Siriwardena, Tom Quinn

Abstract

Prehospital ambulance based research has unique ethical considerations due to urgency, time limitations and the locations involved. We sought to explore these issues through interviews with experts in this research field. We undertook semi-structured interviews with expert informants, primarily based in the UK, seeking their views and experiences of ethics in ambulance based clinical research. Participants were questioned regarding their experiences of ambulance based research, their opinions on current regulations and guidelines, and views about their general ethical considerations. Participants were chosen because they were actively involved in, or in their expert capacity (e.g. law) expressed an interest in, ambulance based research. Fourteen participants were interviewed including principal investigators, researchers, ethicists and medical lawyers. Five major themes were identified: Capacity, Consent, Clinical Considerations, Consultation and Regulation. Questions regarding consent and capacity were foremost in the discussions as all participants highlighted these as areas for concern. The challenges and use of multiple consent models reflected the complexity of research in this environment. The clinical theme referred to the role of paramedics in research and how research involving ambulance services is increasingly informing improvements to patient care and outcomes and reducing the burden on hospital services. Most felt that, although current regulations were fit for purpose, more specific guidance on implementing these in the ambulance setting would be beneficial. This related closely to the theme of consultation, which examined the key role of ethics committees and other regulatory bodies, as well as public engagement. By interviewing experts in research or ethics in this setting we were able to identify key concerns and highlight areas for future development such as improved guidance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users 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 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 11 25%
Student > Master 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 14 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Unspecified 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 16 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 26 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,842,495
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#169
of 1,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,087
of 467,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,049 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 467,358 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.