↓ Skip to main content

Applying the disability-adjusted life year to track health impact of social franchise programs in low- and middle-income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Applying the disability-adjusted life year to track health impact of social franchise programs in low- and middle-income countries
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-s2-s4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominic Montagu, Lek Ngamkitpaiboon, Susan Duvall, Amy Ratcliffe

Abstract

Developing effective methods for measuring the health impact of social franchising programs is vital for demonstrating the value of this innovative service delivery model, particularly given its rapid expansion worldwide. Currently, these programs define success through patient volume and number of outlets, widely acknowledged as poor reflections of true program impact. An existing metric, the disability-adjusted life years averted (DALYs averted), offers promise as a measure of projected impact. Country-specific and service-specific, DALYs averted enables impact comparisons between programs operating in different contexts. This study explores the use of DALYs averted as a social franchise performance metric.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
Kenya 1 1%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 18 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 August 2018.
All research outputs
#5,240,751
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,186
of 17,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,420
of 209,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#87
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 209,418 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.