↓ Skip to main content

A missing ethical competency? A review of critical reflection in health promotion

Overview of attention for article published in Health Promotion Journal of Australia, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A missing ethical competency? A review of critical reflection in health promotion
Published in
Health Promotion Journal of Australia, December 2015
DOI 10.1071/he15047
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Tretheway, Jane Taylor, Lily O'Hara, Nikki Percival

Abstract

Issue addressed: There is increasing emphasis in the health promotion literature on the ethical imperative for the profession to move towards critical practice. A key challenge for health promotion is that critical practice appears both under-developed and under-practiced. This is evident in the omission of critical reflection from Australian and international competencies for health promotion practitioners.Methods: A narrative literature review was undertaken to explore the current use of critical reflection in health promotion. Critical reflection models relevant to health promotion were identified and critiqued.Results: There was a dearth of literature on critical reflection within health promotion, despite recognition of its potential to support critical practice. The discipline of critical social work provided literature on the use, effect and outcome of critical reflection in practice. The interdisciplinary critical reflection model was identified as the model most applicable to health promotion. Underpinned by critical theory, this model emphasises both critical and ethical practice.Conclusions: Critical reflection is a core competency for health promotion practitioners to address the ethical imperative to move towards critical practice. There is a need to explore the application of a critical reflection model in health promotion to determine how it may support critical and ethical practice.So what?: If health promotion is to meet its ethical responsibilities, then critical reflection needs to be articulated as a core health promotion competency and a model for its application in health promotion developed.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 18%
Social Sciences 8 16%
Arts and Humanities 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 December 2015.
All research outputs
#2,707,474
of 24,520,935 outputs
Outputs from Health Promotion Journal of Australia
#141
of 993 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,197
of 398,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Promotion Journal of Australia
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,935 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 993 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 398,642 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 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.