↓ Skip to main content

Conflicts Between Parents and Health Professionals About a Child’s Medical Treatment: Using Clinical Ethics Records to Find Gaps in the Bioethics Literature

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 249)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Conflicts Between Parents and Health Professionals About a Child’s Medical Treatment: Using Clinical Ethics Records to Find Gaps in the Bioethics Literature
Published in
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11673-015-9643-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosalind McDougall, Lauren Notini, Jessica Phillips

Abstract

Clinical ethics records offer bioethics researchers a rich source of cases that clinicians have identified as ethically complex. In this paper, we suggest that clinical ethics records can be used to point to types of cases that lack attention in the current bioethics literature, identifying new areas in need of more detailed bioethical work. We conducted an analysis of the clinical ethics records of one paediatric hospital in Australia, focusing specifically on conflicts between parents and health professionals about a child's medical treatment. We identified, analysed, and compared cases of this type from the clinical ethics records with cases of this type discussed in bioethics journals. While the cases from journals tended to describe situations involving imminent risk to the child's life, a significant proportion of the clinical ethics records cases involved different stakes for the child involved. These included distress, poorer functional outcome, poorer psychosocial outcome, or increased risk of surgical complications. Our analysis suggests that one type of case that warrants more detailed ethics research is parental refusal of recommended treatment, where the refusal does not endanger the child's life but rather some other aspect of the child's well-being.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 24%
Librarian 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Lecturer 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Other 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Psychology 3 18%
Computer Science 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Other 5 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 13 September 2016.
All research outputs
#270,133
of 8,372,629 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#9
of 249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,963
of 230,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,372,629 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 249 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. 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 230,907 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.