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 |
The four principles: Can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making?
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, May 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6939-13-10 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Katie Page |
Abstract |
The four principles of Beauchamp and Childress--autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice--have been extremely influential in the field of medical ethics, and are fundamental for understanding the current approach to ethical assessment in health care. This study tests whether these principles can be quantitatively measured on an individual level, and then subsequently if they are used in the decision making process when individuals are faced with ethical dilemmas. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 4 | 31% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
Spain | 1 | 8% |
Unknown | 7 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 10 | 77% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 875 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 2 | <1% |
United States | 2 | <1% |
Spain | 2 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Portugal | 1 | <1% |
Turkey | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 865 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 212 | 24% |
Student > Master | 128 | 15% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 52 | 6% |
Researcher | 41 | 5% |
Student > Postgraduate | 38 | 4% |
Other | 129 | 15% |
Unknown | 275 | 31% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 195 | 22% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 134 | 15% |
Social Sciences | 38 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 31 | 4% |
Psychology | 31 | 4% |
Other | 141 | 16% |
Unknown | 305 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 15 June 2023.
All research outputs
#846,555
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#51
of 1,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,193
of 179,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 179,612 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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.