↓ Skip to main content

Psychiatry during the Nazi era: ethical lessons for the modern professional

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of General Psychiatry, February 2007
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 (#8 of 341)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
47 tweeters
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Psychiatry during the Nazi era: ethical lessons for the modern professional
Published in
Annals of General Psychiatry, February 2007
DOI 10.1186/1744-859x-6-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rael D Strous

Abstract

For the first time in history, psychiatrists during the Nazi era sought to systematically exterminate their patients. However, little has been published from this dark period analyzing what may be learned for clinical and research psychiatry. At each stage in the murderous process lay a series of unethical and heinous practices, with many psychiatrists demonstrating a profound commitment to the atrocities, playing central, pivotal roles critical to the success of Nazi policy. Several misconceptions led to this misconduct, including allowing philosophical constructs to define clinical practice, focusing exclusively on preventative medicine, allowing political pressures to influence practice, blurring the roles of clinicians and researchers, and falsely believing that good science and good ethics always co-exist. Psychiatry during this period provides a most horrifying example of how science may be perverted by external forces. It thus becomes crucial to include the Nazi era psychiatry experience in ethics training as an example of proper practice gone awry.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Other 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 17 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 39%
Social Sciences 7 18%
Psychology 5 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 5 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 25 September 2019.
All research outputs
#398,610
of 13,701,498 outputs
Outputs from Annals of General Psychiatry
#8
of 341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,992
of 85,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of General Psychiatry
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,701,498 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 341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 85,584 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them