The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 |
Should US Physicians Support the Decriminalization of Commercial Sex?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.sect1-1701 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily F Rothman |
| Abstract |
According to the World Health Organization, "commercial sex" is the exchange of money or goods for sexual services, and this term can be applied to both consensual and nonconsensual exchanges. Some nonconsensual exchanges qualify as human trafficking. Whether the form of commercial sex that is also known as prostitution should be decriminalized is being debated contentiously around the world, in part because the percentage of commercial sex exchanges that are consensual as opposed to nonconsensual, or trafficked, is unknown. This paper explores the question of decriminalization of commercial sex with reference to the bioethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, and respect for autonomy. It concludes that though there is no perfect policy solution to the various ethical problems associated with commercial sex that can arise under either criminalized or decriminalized conditions, the Nordic model offers several potential advantages. This model criminalizes the buying of sex and third-party brokering of sex (i.e., pimping) but exempts sex sellers (i.e., prostitutes, sex workers) from criminal penalties. However, ongoing support for this type of policy should be contingent upon positive results over time. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 28% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 17 | 68% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 80% |
| Scientists | 3 | 12% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 15% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 08 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,482,557
of 26,491,397 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#448
of 2,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,855
of 428,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#11
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,491,397 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 2,818 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 84% 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 428,153 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 93% 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 well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.