↓ Skip to main content

Resources, attitudes and culture: an understanding of the factors that influence the functioning of accountability mechanisms in primary health care settings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
317 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
Resources, attitudes and culture: an understanding of the factors that influence the functioning of accountability mechanisms in primary health care settings
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-320
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan M Cleary, Sassy Molyneux, Lucy Gilson

Abstract

District level health system governance is recognised as an important but challenging element of health system development in low and middle-income countries. Accountability is a more recent focus in health system debates. Accountability mechanisms are governance tools that seek to regulate answerability between the health system and the community (external accountability) and/or between different levels of the health system (bureaucratic accountability). External accountability has attracted significant attention in recent years, but bureaucratic accountability mechanisms, and the interactions between the two forms of accountability, have been relatively neglected. This is an important gap given that webs of accountability relationships exist within every health system. There is a need to strike a balance between achieving accountability upwards within the health system (for example through information reporting arrangements) while at the same time allowing for the local level innovation that could improve quality of care and patient responsiveness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 317 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Indonesia 3 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 298 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 69 22%
Researcher 45 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 13%
Other 25 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 6%
Other 63 20%
Unknown 54 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 75 24%
Social Sciences 67 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 23 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 4%
Other 45 14%
Unknown 60 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 29 September 2022.
All research outputs
#3,637,533
of 25,455,127 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,661
of 8,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,425
of 194,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#17
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,455,127 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,681 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 194,588 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.