↓ Skip to main content

The Ethical Self-Fashioning of Physicians and Health Care Systems in Culturally Appropriate Health Care

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
Title
The Ethical Self-Fashioning of Physicians and Health Care Systems in Culturally Appropriate Health Care
Published in
Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, May 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11013-011-9215-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan J. Shaw, Julie Armin

Abstract

Diverse advocacy groups have pushed for the recognition of cultural differences in health care as a means to redress inequalities in the U.S., elaborating a form of biocitizenship that draws on evidence of racial and ethnic health disparities to make claims on both the state and health care providers. These efforts led to federal regulations developed by the U.S. Office of Minority Health requiring health care organizations to provide Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services. Based on ethnographic research at workshops and conferences, in-depth interviews with cultural competence trainers, and an analysis of postings to a moderated listserv with 2,000 members, we explore cultural competence trainings as a new type of social technology in which health care providers and institutions are urged to engage in ethical self-fashioning to eliminate prejudice and embody the values of cultural relativism. Health care providers are called on to re-orient their practice (such as habits of gaze, touch, and decision-making) and to act on their own subjectivities to develop an orientation toward Others that is "culturally competent." We explore the diverse methods that cultural competence trainings use to foster a health care provider's ability to be self-reflexive, including face-to-face workshops and classes and self-guided on-line modules. We argue that the hybrid formation of culturally appropriate health care is becoming detached from its social justice origins as it becomes rationalized by and more firmly embedded in the operations of the health care marketplace.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 153 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 18%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Other 13 8%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 32 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 38 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Psychology 13 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 35 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 March 2022.
All research outputs
#15,052,229
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#515
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,111
of 113,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. 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 113,003 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.