↓ Skip to main content

The four principles: Can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, May 2012
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
9 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
576 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
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 576 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 566 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 157 27%
Student > Master 101 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 7%
Researcher 34 6%
Student > Postgraduate 30 5%
Other 103 18%
Unknown 111 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 153 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 102 18%
Social Sciences 32 6%
Psychology 25 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 4%
Other 115 20%
Unknown 128 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 06 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,235,292
of 19,973,273 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#111
of 876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,365
of 139,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,973,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 139,651 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them