↓ Skip to main content

BMJ

Article Metrics

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Ethics, February 2012
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 (#1 of 2,367)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
Title
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
Published in
Journal of Medical Ethics, February 2012
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2011-100411
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Giubilini, Francesca Minerva

Abstract

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call 'after-birth abortion' (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3,054 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 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
United States 4 1%
Canada 3 1%
Italy 3 1%
Austria 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Poland 2 <1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 237 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 57 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 18%
Researcher 35 13%
Student > Master 34 12%
Other 20 7%
Other 78 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 23%
Social Sciences 37 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 14%
Philosophy 33 12%
Arts and Humanities 21 8%
Other 82 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3061. 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 17 July 2019.
All research outputs
#235
of 13,239,540 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Ethics
#1
of 2,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3
of 119,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Ethics
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,239,540 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 119,192 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 96% of its contemporaries.