↓ Skip to main content

Race trouble: experiences of Black medical specialist trainees in South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
Title
Race trouble: experiences of Black medical specialist trainees in South Africa
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12914-016-0108-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Thackwell, Leslie Swartz, Sipho Dlamini, Lebogang Phahladira, Rudzani Muloiwa, Bonginkosi Chiliza

Abstract

This research aimed to identify and explore the experiences of Black registrars in their training in the Western Cape's academic hospitals in order to identify structures, practices, attitudes and ideologies that may promote or impede the advancement of Black doctors into specialist medicine. This is justified by the requirement for universities to work towards monitoring and evaluating efforts to create non-discriminatory and inclusive training environments. This study employed qualitative research methods. Ten Black African medical specialists were interviewed about their training experiences in two university training hospitals in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. Interview data was collected using open-ended questions and coded and analysed using thematic and critical discursive analysis techniques. Four experiential themes emerged from the interview data, they included: 1) experiences of everyday racism during work hours, 2) the physical and psychological effects of tokenism and an increased need to perform, 3) institutional racism as a result of inconsistent and unclear methods of promotion and clinical competence building, and 4) an organisational culture that was experienced as having a race and gender bias. This is a pilot study and there are limits on the generalizability of the data due to the small sample. What is clear from our participants, though, is the strong experiential component of finding it challenging to be a Black trainee in a White-dominated profession. We are undertaking further research to explore the issues raised in more detail.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Singapore 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 80 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Master 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 17%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Psychology 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 28 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 March 2023.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,335
of 17,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,864
of 416,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#162
of 207 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 416,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 207 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.