↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare access as a right, not a privilege: a construct of Western thought

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Healthcare access as a right, not a privilege: a construct of Western thought
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, March 2007
DOI 10.1186/1747-5341-2-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas J Papadimos

Abstract

Over 45 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured. Those living in poverty exhibit the worst health status. Employment, education, income, and race are important factors in a person's ability to acquire healthcare access. Having established that there are people lacking healthcare access due to multi-factorial etiologies, the question arises as to whether the intervention necessary to assist them in obtaining such access should be considered a privilege, or a right. The right to healthcare access is examined from the perspective of Western thought. Specifically through the works of Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Paine, Hannah Arendt, James Rawls, and Norman Daniels, which are accompanied by a contemporary example of intervention on behalf of the medically needy by the The Johns Hopkins Urban Health Institute. As human beings we are all valuable social entities whereby, through the force of morality, through implicitly forged covenants among us as individuals and between us and our governments, and through the natural rights we maintain as individuals and those we collectively surrender to the common good, it has been determined by nature, natural laws, and natural rights that human beings have the right, not the privilege, to healthcare access.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 17%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Master 9 11%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Philosophy 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,019,243
of 25,386,051 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#78
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,357
of 91,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,386,051 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 91,246 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.