↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Ethical implications of digital images for teaching and learning purposes: an integrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 173)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Ethical implications of digital images for teaching and learning purposes: an integrative review
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s84488
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel Kornhaber, Vasiliki Betihavas, Rodney J Baber, Rodney Baber

Abstract

Digital photography has simplified the process of capturing and utilizing medical images. The process of taking high-quality digital photographs has been recognized as efficient, timely, and cost-effective. In particular, the evolution of smartphone and comparable technologies has become a vital component in teaching and learning of health care professionals. However, ethical standards in relation to digital photography for teaching and learning have not always been of the highest standard. The inappropriate utilization of digital images within the health care setting has the capacity to compromise patient confidentiality and increase the risk of litigation. Therefore, the aim of this review was to investigate the literature concerning the ethical implications for health professionals utilizing digital photography for teaching and learning. A literature search was conducted utilizing five electronic databases, PubMed, Embase (Excerpta Medica Database), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Educational Resources Information Center, and Scopus, limited to English language. Studies that endeavored to evaluate the ethical implications of digital photography for teaching and learning purposes in the health care setting were included. The search strategy identified 514 papers of which nine were retrieved for full review. Four papers were excluded based on the inclusion criteria, leaving five papers for final analysis. Three key themes were developed: knowledge deficit, consent and beyond, and standards driving scope of practice. The assimilation of evidence in this review suggests that there is value for health professionals utilizing digital photography for teaching purposes in health education. However, there is limited understanding of the process of obtaining and storage and use of such mediums for teaching purposes. Disparity was also highlighted related to policy and guideline identification and development in clinical practice. Therefore, the implementation of policy to guide practice requires further research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Bahamas 1 2%
Unknown 59 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 21%
Researcher 11 18%
Other 6 10%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 15%
Computer Science 8 13%
Social Sciences 7 11%
Chemistry 1 2%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 11 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,031,723
of 5,568,281 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#50
of 173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,085
of 192,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,568,281 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 63rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 192,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.