↓ Skip to main content

Lack of Cultural Competency in International Aid Responses: The Ebola Outbreak in Liberia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, January 2017
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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Lack of Cultural Competency in International Aid Responses: The Ebola Outbreak in Liberia
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Grace Southall, Sarah E. DeYoung, Curt Andrew Harris

Abstract

A cornerstone of effective disaster management is that response should always begin and end at the local level (1). The response to the Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in Liberia, West Africa, was a combination of independent efforts by many nations and organizations. Many of these independent efforts ignored or were not able to work with the local levels of emergency management in Liberia. This oversight occurred because of the Liberian's mistrust of both their government and foreign aid groups, as well as the lack of cultural competency demonstrated by the aid groups. The health-care and emergency management infrastructure in Liberia appeared to be non-existent at the beginning of the EVD outbreak. However, there were resources available at the community level: the Liberians and their culture. Although these resources were rarely used, there were some instances in which communities were included in response efforts. It was in these instances that possible improvements to international disaster response protocol were found.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 5 5%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 29 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Social Sciences 14 15%
Arts and Humanities 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,715,291
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#1,326
of 10,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,308
of 420,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#20
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,096 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 420,210 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 74% of its contemporaries.