The Lancet and colonialism: past, present, and future
The Lancet, ISSN: 0140-6736, Vol: 403, Issue: 10433, Page: 1304-1308
2024
- 7Citations
- 7Usage
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- CrossRef4
- Usage7
- Abstract Views7
- Captures15
- Readers15
- 15
Review Description
The historical and contemporary alignment of medical and health journals with colonial practices needs elucidation. Colonialism, which sought to exploit colonised people and places, was justified by the prejudice that colonised people's ways of knowing and being are inferior to those of the colonisers. Institutions for knowledge production and dissemination, including academic journals, were therefore central to sustaining colonialism and its legacies today. This invited Viewpoint focuses on The Lancet, following its 200th anniversary, and is especially important given the extent of The Lancet ‘s global influence. We illuminate links between The Lancet and colonialism, with examples from the past and present, showing how the journal legitimised and continues to promote specific types of knowers, knowledge, perspectives, and interpretations in health and medicine. The Lancet ‘s role in colonialism is not unique; other institutions and publications across the British empire cooperated with empire-building through colonisation. We therefore propose investigations and raise questions to encourage broader contestation on the practices, audience, positionality, and ownership of journals claiming leadership in global knowledge production.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673624001028; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(24)00102-8; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85188934190&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38555135; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140673624001028; https://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_fhs_mc_pathol_microbiol/1508; https://ecommons.aku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2506&context=pakistan_fhs_mc_pathol_microbiol; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736%2824%2900102-8; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736%2824%2900102-8
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know