↓ Skip to main content

Phenomenology and its application in medicine

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
162 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
271 Mendeley
Title
Phenomenology and its application in medicine
Published in
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, November 2010
DOI 10.1007/s11017-010-9161-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Havi Carel

Abstract

Phenomenology is a useful methodology for describing and ordering experience. As such, phenomenology can be specifically applied to the first person experience of illness in order to illuminate this experience and enable health care providers to enhance their understanding of it. However, this approach has been underutilized in the philosophy of medicine as well as in medical training and practice. This paper demonstrates the usefulness of phenomenology to clinical medicine. In order to describe the experience of illness, we need a phenomenological approach that gives the body a central role and acknowledges the primacy of perception. I present such a phenomenological method and show how it could usefully illuminate the experience of illness through a set of concepts taken from Merleau-Ponty. His distinction between the biological body and the body as lived, analysis of the habitual body, and the notions of motor intentionality and intentional arc are used to capture the experience of illness. I then discuss the applications this approach could have in medicine. These include narrowing the gap between objective assessments of well-being in illness and subjective experiences which are varied and diverse; developing a more attuned dialogue between physicians and patients based on a thick understanding of illness; developing research methods that are informed by phenomenology and thus go beyond existing qualitative methods; and providing medical staff with a concrete understanding of the impact of illness on the life-world of patients.

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 271 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Iceland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 267 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 17%
Researcher 29 11%
Student > Bachelor 27 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 8%
Other 48 18%
Unknown 50 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 19%
Social Sciences 43 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 11%
Psychology 25 9%
Philosophy 16 6%
Other 50 18%
Unknown 55 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 14 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,344,728
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#88
of 382 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,529
of 189,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 382 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 189,079 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 77% 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