↓ Skip to main content

Unravelling networks in local public health policymaking in three European countries – a systems analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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.
Title
Unravelling networks in local public health policymaking in three European countries – a systems analysis
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12961-016-0168-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hilde P. E. M. Spitters, Cathrine J. Lau, Petru Sandu, Marcel Quanjel, Diana Dulf, Charlotte Glümer, Hans A. M. van Oers, Ien A. M. van de Goor

Abstract

Facilitating and enhancing interaction between stakeholders involved in the policymaking process to stimulate collaboration and use of evidence, is important to foster the development of effective Health Enhancing Physical Activity (HEPA) policies. Performing an analysis of real-world policymaking processes will help reveal the complexity of a network of stakeholders. Therefore, the main objectives were to unravel the stakeholder network in the policy process by conducting three systems analyses, and to increase insight into the similarities and differences in the policy processes of these European country cases. A systems analysis of the local HEPA policymaking process was performed in three European countries involved in the 'REsearch into POlicy to enhance Physical Activity' (REPOPA) project, resulting in three schematic models showing the main stakeholders and their relationships. The models were used to compare the systems, focusing on implications with respect to collaboration and use of evidence in local HEPA policymaking. Policy documents and relevant webpages were examined and main stakeholders were interviewed. The systems analysis in each country identified the main stakeholders involved and their position and relations in the policymaking process. The Netherlands and Denmark were the most similar and both differed most from Romania, especially at the level of accountability of the local public authorities for local HEPA policymaking. The categories of driving forces underlying the relations between stakeholders were formal relations, informal interaction and knowledge exchange. A systems analysis providing detailed descriptions of positions and relations in the stakeholder network in local level HEPA policymaking is rather unique in this area. The analyses are useful when a need arises for increased interaction, collaboration and use of knowledge between stakeholders in the local HEPA network, as they provide an overview of the stakeholders involved and their mutual relations. This information can be an important starting point to enhance the uptake of evidence and build more effective public health policies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Professor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,045,457
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#1,004
of 1,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,852
of 420,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#20
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 420,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.