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 |
Is Lower Quality Clinical Care Ethically Justifiable for Patients Residing in Areas with Infrastructure Deficits?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.3.ecas1-1803 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcia C Inhorn, Pasquale Patrizio |
| Abstract |
Reproductive health services, including infertility care, are important in countries with infrastructure deficits, such as Lebanon, which now hosts more than one million Syrian refugees. Islamic prohibitions on child adoption and third-party reproductive assistance (donor eggs, sperm, embryos, and surrogacy) mean that most Muslim couples must turn to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to overcome their childlessness. Attempts to bring low-cost IVF-ICSI to underserved populations might help infertile couples where no other services are available. However, a low-cost IVF-ICSI protocol for male infertility remains technically challenging and thus may result in two standards of clinical care. Nonetheless, low-cost IVF-ICSI represents a form of reproductive justice in settings with infrastructure deficits and is clearly better than no treatment at all. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 19% |
| Unknown | 22 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 25 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,974,752
of 26,107,266 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#875
of 2,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,097
of 348,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#25
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,107,266 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,795 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 348,574 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.