↓ Skip to main content

Reflections from the Lebanese field: “First, heal thyself”

Overview of attention for article published in Conflict and Health, February 2018
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 (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Reflections from the Lebanese field: “First, heal thyself”
Published in
Conflict and Health, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13031-018-0144-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zeina Chemali, Hannah Smati, Kelsey Johnson, Christina P. C. Borba, Gregory L. Fricchione

Abstract

Humanitarian aid workers caring for Syrian refugees face major stressors as they attend to refugees' needs on the field. Without adequate psychosocial support, evidence has shown that fieldworkers experience high burnout and turnover as well as long-term poor mental health. Unfortunately, scarce training in this regard leaves them ill-equipped to care for themselves and practice resilience while handling trauma in the field. This paper highlights our reflection on working with mindfulness programs during humanitarian crises, specifically how our program, Stress Management and Relaxation Response Training (SMART), has helped over time fieldworkers and the community they cared for. We propose that programs targeting the wellbeing of fieldworkers should be prioritized as part of efforts to improve the international aid response although they may require impeccable coordination and generous resources. We encourage donors to fund those projects viewed as special social protection programs building resilience and strengthening within system support. We argue that this will increase the efficacy of the crisis intervention and work towards sustainable peace building.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 35 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Arts and Humanities 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 41 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 15 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,945,473
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Conflict and Health
#291
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,319
of 330,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conflict and Health
#12
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 330,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.