| Title |
Interventions to promote informed consent for patients undergoing surgical and other invasive healthcare procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009445.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Kinnersley, Katie Phillips, Katherine Savage, Mark J Kelly, Elinor Farrell, Ben Morgan, Robert Whistance, Vicky Lewis, Mala K Mann, Bethan L Stephens, Jane Blazeby, Glyn Elwyn, Adrian GK Edwards |
| Abstract |
Achieving informed consent is a core clinical procedure and is required before any surgical or invasive procedure is undertaken. However, it is a complex process which requires patients be provided with information which they can understand and retain, opportunity to consider their options, and to be able to express their opinions and ask questions. There is evidence that at present some patients undergo procedures without informed consent being achieved. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 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 | 34% |
| Australia | 5 | 12% |
| Spain | 5 | 12% |
| Panama | 1 | 2% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 15 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 56% |
| Scientists | 9 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 576 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 568 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 94 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 66 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 11% |
| Researcher | 58 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 43 | 7% |
| Other | 113 | 20% |
| Unknown | 141 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 218 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 67 | 12% |
| Psychology | 37 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 2% |
| Other | 59 | 10% |
| Unknown | 161 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 16 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,387,253
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,172
of 12,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,185
of 195,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 325 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 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 12,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 195,959 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 325 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 73% of its contemporaries.