↓ Skip to main content

How Should We Respond to Non-Dominant Healing Practices, the Example of Homeopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
How Should We Respond to Non-Dominant Healing Practices, the Example of Homeopathy
Published in
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11673-016-9760-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ben Gray

Abstract

The debate around the ethics of homeopathy in recent issues of the journal has been approached as a binary question; is homeopathy ethical or not? This paper suggests that this is an unhelpful question and instead discusses a framework to establish the extent to which the dominant (medical) culture should tolerate non-dominant health practices such as homeopathy. This requires a sophisticated understanding of the placebo effect, a critical evaluation of what evidence is available, a consideration of the harm that the non-dominant practice might cause, and a consideration of how this might be affected by the culture of the patient. This is presented as a matter of cultural competence. At a clinical level clinicians need to respect the values and beliefs of their patients and communicate with all the practitioners involved in a patient's care. At a societal level there are a number of factors to be considered when a community decides which practices to tolerate and to what extent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 30%
Computer Science 3 10%
Philosophy 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,779,833
of 24,167,226 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#296
of 628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,682
of 428,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,167,226 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 428,785 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.