| Title |
Seven Sins of Humanitarian Medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, January 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-009-0373-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David R. Welling, James M. Ryan, David G. Burris, Norman M. Rich |
| Abstract |
The need for humanitarian assistance throughout the world is almost unlimited. Surgeons who go on humanitarian missions are definitely engaged in a noble cause. However, not infrequently, despite the best of intentions, errors are made in attempting to help others. The following are seven areas of concern: 1. Leaving a mess behind. 2. Failing to match technology to local needs and abilities. 3. Failing of non-governmental organizations (NGO's) to cooperate and help each other, and and accept help from military organizations. 4. Failing to have a follow-up plan. 5. Allowing politics, training, or other distracting goals to trump service, while representing the mission as "service". 6. Going where we are not wanted, or needed and/or being poor guests. 7. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason. The goal of this report is to discuss these potential problems, with ideas presented about how we might do humanitarian missions more effectively. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 41% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | 5% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 32% |
| Scientists | 6 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 147 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 12% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 42 | 27% |
| Unknown | 28 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 53% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,229,114
of 24,702,628 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#277
of 4,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,602
of 173,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#4
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,702,628 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 173,714 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.