↓ Skip to main content

A proposal for a worldwide definition of health resort medicine, balneology, medical hydrology and climatology

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Biometeorology, June 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 (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
189 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
Title
A proposal for a worldwide definition of health resort medicine, balneology, medical hydrology and climatology
Published in
International Journal of Biometeorology, June 2010
DOI 10.1007/s00484-010-0321-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Gutenbrunner, Tamas Bender, Pedro Cantista, Zeki Karagülle

Abstract

Health Resort Medicine, Balneology, Medical Hydrology and Climatology are not fully recognised as independent medical specialties at a global international level. Analysing the reasons, we can identify both external (from outside the field) and internal (from inside the field) factors. External arguments include, e.g. the lack of scientific evidence, the fact that Balneotherapy and Climatotherapy is not used in all countries, and the fact that Health Resort Medicine, Balneology, Medical Hydrology and Climatology focus only on single methods and do not have a comprehensive concept. Implicit barriers are the lack of international accepted terms in the field, the restriction of being allowed to practice the activities only in specific settings, and the trend to use Balneotherapy mainly for wellness concepts. Especially the implicit barriers should be subject to intense discussions among scientists and specialists. This paper suggests one option to tackle the problem of implicit barriers by making a proposal for a structure and description of the medical field, and to provide some commonly acceptable descriptions of content and terminology. The medical area can be defined as "medicine in health resorts" (or "health resort medicine"). Health resort medicine includes "all medical activities originated and derived in health resorts based on scientific evidence aiming at health promotion, prevention, therapy and rehabilitation". Core elements of health resort interventions in health resorts are balneotherapy, hydrotherapy, and climatotherapy. Health resort medicine can be used for health promotion, prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation. The use of natural mineral waters, gases and peloids in many countries is called balneotherapy, but other (equivalent) terms exist. Substances used for balneotherapy are medical mineral waters, medical peloids, and natural gases (bathing, drinking, inhalation, etc.). The use of plain water (tap water) for therapy is called hydrotherapy, and the use of climatic factors for therapy is called climatotherapy. Reflecting the effects of health resort medicine, it is important to take other environmental factors into account. These can be classified within the framework of the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). Examples include receiving health care by specialised doctors, being well educated (ICF-domain: e355), having an environment supporting social contacts (family, peer groups) (cf. ICF-domains: d740, d760), facilities for recreation, cultural activities, leisure and sports (cf. ICF-domain: d920), access to a health-promoting atmosphere and an environment close to nature (cf. ICF-domain: e210). The scientific field dealing with health resort medicine is called health resort sciences. It includes the medical sciences, psychology, social sciences, technical sciences, chemistry, physics, geography, jurisprudence, etc. Finally, this paper proposes a systematic international discussion of descriptions in the field of Health Resort Medicine, Balneology, Medical Hydrology and Climatology, and discusses short descriptive terms with the goal of achieving internationally accepted distinct terms. This task should be done via a structured consensus process and is of major importance for the publication of scientific results as well as for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 162 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 13%
Student > Master 17 10%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 53 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Sports and Recreations 9 5%
Psychology 5 3%
Environmental Science 4 2%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 60 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 25 May 2021.
All research outputs
#4,567,342
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Biometeorology
#512
of 1,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,224
of 96,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Biometeorology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 96,765 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 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.