IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0001550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Historical determinants of neurosurgical inequities in Africa and the African diaspora: A review and analysis of coloniality

Author

Listed:
  • Ernest J Barthélemy
  • Sylviane A Diouf
  • Ana Cristina Veiga Silva
  • Nancy Abu-Bonsrah
  • Isabella Assunção Santos de Souza
  • Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye
  • Phabinly Gabriel
  • Kwadwo Sarpong
  • Edjah K Nduom
  • Jean Wilguens Lartigue
  • Ignatius Esene
  • Claire Karekezi

Abstract

The movement to decolonize global health challenges clinicians and researchers of sub-disciplines, like global neurosurgery, to redefine their field. As an era of racial reckoning recentres the colonial roots of modern health disparities, reviewing the historical determinants of these disparities can constructively inform decolonization. This article presents a review and analysis of the historical determinants of neurosurgical inequities as understood by a group of scholars who share Sub-Saharan African descent. Vignettes profiling the colonial histories of Cape Verde, Rwanda, Cameroon, Ghana, Brazil, and Haiti illustrate the role of the colonial legacy in the currently unmet need for neurosurgical care in each of these nations. Following this review, a bibliographic lexical analysis of relevant terms then introduces a discussion of converging historical themes, and practical suggestions for transforming global neurosurgery through the decolonial humanism promulgated by anti-racist practices and the dialogic frameworks of conscientization.

Suggested Citation

  • Ernest J Barthélemy & Sylviane A Diouf & Ana Cristina Veiga Silva & Nancy Abu-Bonsrah & Isabella Assunção Santos de Souza & Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye & Phabinly Gabriel & Kwadwo Sarpong & Edjah K Nduom , 2023. "Historical determinants of neurosurgical inequities in Africa and the African diaspora: A review and analysis of coloniality," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(2), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001550
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001550
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001550&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001550?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.