The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 Role of Hope, Compassion, and Uncertainty in Physicians' Reluctance to Initiate Palliative Care.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1001/amajethics.2018.782 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nora W Wong |
| Abstract |
This article addresses whether physicians' close ties to their patients might play an unexamined role in their reluctance to initiate palliative care. In cases characterized by uncertainty, physicians' emotional investment in their patients and patients' families might unduly promote decisions to continue aggressive treatment rather than transition to comfort care. Continued evaluation and communication of patient status, including scheduled objective consultations, can align compassionate actions with patients' best interests. This argument and analysis are based on a case of new onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE). |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 13 | 30% |
| Colombia | 4 | 9% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Bhutan | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 22 | 51% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 21% |
| Scientists | 6 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Librarian | 2 | 5% |
| Researcher | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 12 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,495,474
of 26,122,087 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#457
of 2,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,114
of 345,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#19
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,122,087 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. 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 345,232 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 57% of its contemporaries.