↓ Skip to main content

A Physician’s Perspective on Volunteering Overseas… It Is Not All about Sharing the Latest Technology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Surgery, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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 Physician’s Perspective on Volunteering Overseas… It Is Not All about Sharing the Latest Technology
Published in
Frontiers in Surgery, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fsurg.2017.00077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jon Kolkin

Abstract

As health-care professionals, there often comes a time in our career when we are intrigued by the possibility of participating in humanitarian work in underserved countries. However, the desire to serve is often tempered by some ambivalence about whether our skill sets are applicable in less technologically advanced health-care settings. Furthermore, there may be some concern about the cultural and logistical challenges one might face while working overseas. A volunteer may also be worried that, despite their best intentions, the medical personnel in the host country will not take advantage of our knowledge and their patients will not achieve the best results. As a consequence, a talented and well-intentioned professional may decide not to volunteer, resulting in a lost opportunity to participate in what can be an extremely rewarding experience. I will be discussing a number of key factors that can strongly influence the quality of one's experience from the perspective of a Hand Specialist. My comments will primarily be a reflection of my personal experience over 20 years as a member of Health Volunteers Overseas (www.hvousa.org).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Master 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 9 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 18%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Decision Sciences 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 11 50%
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 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,090,698
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#409
of 2,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,090
of 439,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,994 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. 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 439,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 66% of its contemporaries.