| Title |
Health Care Professionals and Bedbugs: An Ethical Analysis of a Resurgent Scourge
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
HEC Forum, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10730-013-9209-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maude Laliberté, Matthew Hunt, Bryn Williams-Jones, Debbie Ehrmann Feldman |
| Abstract |
Many health care professionals (HCPs) are understandably reluctant to treat patients in environments infested with bedbugs, in part due to the risk of themselves becoming bedbug vectors to their own homes and workplaces. However, bedbugs are increasingly widespread in care settings, such as nursing homes, as well as in private homes visited by HCPs, leading to increased questions of how health care organizations and their staff ought to respond. This situation is associated with a range of ethical considerations including the duty of care, stigmatization, vulnerability, confidentiality, risks for third parties, and professional autonomy. In this article, we analyze these issues using a case study approach. We consider how patients whose living environments are infested with bedbugs can receive care in the community setting in a manner that supports their well-being, is consistent with fairness in care provision, and takes into account risks for HCPs and third parties. We also discuss limits and obstacles to the provision of care in these situations. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 36% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 08 February 2013.
All research outputs
#2,925,846
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from HEC Forum
#24
of 184 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,946
of 282,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEC Forum
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 184 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 282,854 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them