↓ Skip to main content

A proposal for teaching bioethics in high schools using appropriate visual education tools

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
A proposal for teaching bioethics in high schools using appropriate visual education tools
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13010-018-0064-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chiedozie G. Ike, Nancy Anderson

Abstract

Teaching bioethics with visual education tools, such as movies and comics, is a unique way of explaining the history and progress of human research and the art and science of medicine to high school students. For more than a decade, bioethical concepts have appeared in movies, and these films are useful for teaching medical and research ethics in high schools. Using visual tools to teach bioethics can have both interpretational and transformational effects on learners that will enhance their overall understanding of complex moral and legal issues in medicine and research.High school students are uniquely suited to learn bioethics because they will soon become legal adults. As adults, they will make moral decisions that may affect their health and wellbeing as well as that of their communities and societies.However, not all visual education tools are appropriate for bioethics pedagogy in high school. Bioethics film and comic producers must consider the specifics of student age, race, gender, belief, level of education, and sexual orientation. Such tools must not be dominated by either dystopic or utopic genres, must aim for objectivity, and must consider the complexity of ethical decision making. It is critical that the teacher, who is the final arbiter regarding the use of visual tools in the classroom, determines that the visual learning tool is acceptable for students in any particular education context. In addition, during the conceptualization and creation of these tools, bioethics film and comic producers must work harder to ensure that these visual tools are devoid of any form of stereotyping.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Lecturer 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Arts and Humanities 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 38 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 22 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,428,234
of 25,715,849 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#143
of 235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,878
of 341,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,715,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 341,089 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.