You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Funding global emergency medicine research—from seed grants to NIH support
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Emergency Medicine, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12245-016-0121-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bhakti Hansoti, Adam Levine, Latha Ganti, Rockefeller Oteng, Taylor DesRosiers, Payal Modi, Jeremy Brown |
| Abstract |
Funding for global health has grown significantly over the past two decades. Numerous funding opportunities for international development and research work exist; however, they can be difficult to navigate. The 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference on global health and emergency care identified the need to strengthen global emergency care research funding, solidify existing funding streams, and expand funding sources. This piece focuses on the various federal funding opportunities available to support emergency physicians conducting international research from seed funding to large institutional grants. In particular, we focus on the application and review processes for the Fulbright and Fogarty programs, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Career development awards, and the Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI), including tips and pathways through each application process. Lastly, the paper provides an index that may be used as a guide in determining whether the amount of funding provided by a grant is worth the effort in applying. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 27% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Kenya | 1 | 7% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 80% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#3,721,769
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#132
of 610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,423
of 318,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Emergency Medicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 318,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them