↓ Skip to main content

Right to health and social justice in Bangladesh: ethical dilemmas and obligations of state and non-state actors to ensure health for urban poor

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Right to health and social justice in Bangladesh: ethical dilemmas and obligations of state and non-state actors to ensure health for urban poor
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12910-018-0285-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sohana Shafique, Dipika S. Bhattacharyya, Iqbal Anwar, Alayne Adams

Abstract

The world is urbanizing rapidly; more than half the world's population now lives in urban areas, leading to significant transition in lifestyles and social behaviours globally. While offering many advantages, urban environments also concentrate health risks and introduce health hazards for the poor. In Bangladesh, although many public policies are directed towards equity and protecting people's rights, these are not comprehensively and inclusively applied in ways that prioritize the health rights of citizens. The country is thus facing many issues that raise moral and ethical concerns. A narrative literature review was conducted between October 2016 and November 2017 on issues related to social justice, health, and human rights in urban Bangladesh. The key questions discussed here are: i) ethical dilemmas and inclusion of the urban poor to pursue social justice; and ii) the ethical obligations and moral responsibilities of the state and non-state sectors in serving Bangladesh's urban poor. Using a Rawlsian theory of equality of opportunity to ensure social justice, we identified key health-related ethical issues in the country's rapidly changing urban landscape, especially among the poor. We examined ethical dilemmas in Bangladesh's health system through the rural-urban divide and the lack of coordination among implementing agencies. The unregulated profusion of the private sector and immoral practices of service providers result in high out-of-pocket expenditures for urban poor, leading to debt and further impoverishment. We also highlight policy and programmatic gaps, as well as entry points for safeguarding the right to health for Bangladeshi citizens. The urban health system in Bangladesh needs a reform in which state and non-state actors should work together, understanding and acknowledging their moral responsibilities for improving the health of the urban poor by engaging multiple sectors. The social determinants of health should be taken into account when formulating policies and programs to achieve universal health coverage and ensure social justice for the urban poor in Bangladesh.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 7 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Social Sciences 8 17%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 9%
Unspecified 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 10 22%

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 24 June 2018.
All research outputs
#8,229,823
of 13,127,591 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#466
of 559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,969
of 268,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,127,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 559 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 268,535 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.