↓ 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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
27 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
338 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
893 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 893 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 879 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 139 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 95 11%
Researcher 94 11%
Student > Bachelor 87 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 73 8%
Other 172 19%
Unknown 233 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 207 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 177 20%
Social Sciences 79 9%
Psychology 56 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 2%
Other 102 11%
Unknown 256 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 04 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,072,187
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,160
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,276
of 242,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#47
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 242,042 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 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.