| Title |
The Ethics of Big Data: Current and Foreseeable Issues in Biomedical Contexts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-015-9652-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brent Daniel Mittelstadt, Luciano Floridi |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 14 | 21% |
| United States | 8 | 12% |
| Switzerland | 5 | 7% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Colombia | 2 | 3% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 26 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 41 | 61% |
| Scientists | 18 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 824 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 811 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 152 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 122 | 15% |
| Researcher | 90 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 84 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 45 | 5% |
| Other | 134 | 16% |
| Unknown | 197 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 112 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 101 | 12% |
| Philosophy | 69 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 65 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 49 | 6% |
| Other | 201 | 24% |
| Unknown | 227 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. 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 24 April 2024.
All research outputs
#638,783
of 25,859,234 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#32
of 978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,127
of 282,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#2
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,859,234 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 282,630 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 90% of its contemporaries.