↓ Skip to main content

Medical Humanitarianism: Anthropologists Speak Out on Policy and Practice

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Anthropology Quarterly, October 2014
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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
119 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.
Article details
Title
Medical Humanitarianism: Anthropologists Speak Out on Policy and Practice
Published in
Medical Anthropology Quarterly, October 2014
DOI 10.1111/maq.12139
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In recent years, anthropologists have become increasingly present in medical humanitarian situations as scholars, consultants, and humanitarian practitioners and have acquired insight into medical humanitarian policy and practice. In 2012, we implemented a poll on anthropology, health, and humanitarian practice in which 75 anthropologists discussed their experiences in medical humanitarianism. Our goal was to move beyond the existing anarchy of individual voices in anthropological writing and gain an aggregate view of the perspective of anthropologists working in medical humanitarian contexts. Responses lead to six inductively derived thematic priorities. The findings illustrate how anthropologists perceive medical humanitarian practice; which aspects of medical humanitarianism should be seen as priorities for anthropological research; and how anthropologists use ethnography in humanitarian contexts.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 115 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 8 7%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 29 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 52 44%
Arts and Humanities 11 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Philosophy 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 36 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 18 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,873,792
of 28,832,041 outputs
Outputs from Medical Anthropology Quarterly
#114
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,456
of 278,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Anthropology Quarterly
#6
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,832,041 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. 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 278,495 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.