↓ 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 2,556)
  • 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
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
290 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 3,357 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 290 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%
Portugal 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 254 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 60 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 18%
Student > Master 36 12%
Researcher 35 12%
Other 21 7%
Other 69 24%
Unknown 17 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 23%
Social Sciences 39 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 12%
Philosophy 35 12%
Arts and Humanities 22 8%
Other 74 26%
Unknown 17 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3345. 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 21 February 2020.
All research outputs
#239
of 14,364,599 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Ethics
#1
of 2,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2
of 121,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Ethics
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,364,599 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 2,556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. 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 121,377 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.