↓ Skip to main content

Developing an informational tool for ethical engagement in medical tourism

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
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
Developing an informational tool for ethical engagement in medical tourism
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13010-017-0045-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krystyna Adams, Jeremy Snyder, Valorie A. Crooks, Rory Johnston

Abstract

Medical tourism, the practice of persons intentionally travelling across international boundaries to access medical care, has drawn increasing attention from researchers, particularly in relation to potential ethical concerns of this practice. Researchers have expressed concern for potential negative impacts to individual safety, public health within both countries of origin for medical tourists and destination countries, and global health equity. However, these ethical concerns are not discussed within the sources of information commonly provided to medical tourists, and as such, medical tourists may not be aware of these concerns when engaging in medical tourism. This paper describes the methodology utilized to develop an information sheet intended to be disseminated to Canadian medical tourists to encourage contemplation and further public discussion of the ethical concerns in medical tourism. The methodology for developing the information sheet drew on an iterative process to consider stakeholder feedback on the content and use of the information sheet as it might inform prospective medical tourists' decision making. This methodology includes a literature review as well as formative research with Canadian public health professionals and former medical tourists. The final information sheet underwent numerous revisions throughout the formative research process according to feedback from medical tourism stakeholders. These revisions focused primarily on making the information sheet concise with points that encourage individuals considering travelling for medical tourism to do further research regarding their safety both within the destination country, while travelling, and once returning to Canada, and the potential impacts of their trip on third parties. This methodology may be replicated for the development of information sheets intending to communicate ethical concerns of other practices to providers or consumers of a certain service.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Professor 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 13%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Arts and Humanities 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 16 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,583,579
of 11,753,826 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#137
of 167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,720
of 264,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,753,826 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 264,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.