↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Cultural competence education for health professionals

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
28 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
287 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
783 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Cultural competence education for health professionals
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009405.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lidia Horvat, Dell Horey, Panayiota Romios, John Kis-Rigo

Abstract

Cultural competence education for health professionals aims to ensure all people receive equitable, effective health care, particularly those from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds. It has emerged as a strategy in high-income English-speaking countries in response to evidence of health disparities, structural inequalities, and poorer quality health care and outcomes among people from minority CALD backgrounds. However there is a paucity of evidence to link cultural competence education with patient, professional and organisational outcomes. To assess efficacy, for this review we developed a four-dimensional conceptual framework comprising educational content, pedagogical approach, structure of the intervention, and participant characteristics to provide consistency in describing and assessing interventions. We use the term 'CALD participants' when referring to minority CALD populations as a whole. When referring to participants in included studies we describe them in terms used by study authors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 783 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 769 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 135 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 89 11%
Researcher 88 11%
Student > Bachelor 80 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 70 9%
Other 156 20%
Unknown 165 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 193 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 168 21%
Social Sciences 77 10%
Psychology 54 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 2%
Other 91 12%
Unknown 185 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 21 March 2021.
All research outputs
#896,775
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,938
of 12,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,477
of 227,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#40
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 227,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.