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 |
Understood Consent Versus Informed Consent: A New Paradigm for Obtaining Consent for Pediatric Research Studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pediatrics, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fped.2013.00038 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan F. Isles |
| Abstract |
All too often the informed consent process is viewed by members of research teams as a challenge of getting a parent or young person's signature on a form. Informed consent is, however, much more than a signed form. Rather, it is a process, often iterative, in which the parent or young person is given sufficient information about a study in order that they can make a truly informed decision about participation. Substantial effort is required in producing appropriately formatted and readable documents using plain language at about Grade 6 or 12-year old reading level. Achieving truly understood consent involves the researcher spending significant one-on-one time with the parent or young person explaining in simple language what is proposed and then using so-called repeat-back techniques to test the understanding of the participants. This is critically important if the research involves randomization to different treatments or use of a placebo arm and, in particular if the research involves more than minimal risk. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 3% |
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 February 2021.
All research outputs
#6,448,327
of 23,943,619 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,102
of 6,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,521
of 287,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#4
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,943,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. 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 287,627 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 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 93% of its contemporaries.