↓ Skip to main content

Gender blind? An analysis of global public-private partnerships for health

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#18 of 1,226)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
297 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 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
Gender blind? An analysis of global public-private partnerships for health
Published in
Globalization and Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12992-017-0249-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Hawkes, Kent Buse, Anuj Kapilashrami

Abstract

The Global Public Private Partnerships for Health (GPPPH) constitute an increasingly central part of the global health architecture and carry both financial and normative power. Gender is an important determinant of health status, influencing differences in exposure to health determinants, health behaviours, and the response of the health system. We identified 18 GPPPH - defined as global institutions with a formal governance mechanism which includes both public and private for-profit sector actors - and conducted a gender analysis of each. Gender was poorly mainstreamed through the institutional functioning of the partnerships. Half of these partnerships had no mention of gender in their overall institutional strategy and only three partnerships had a specific gender strategy. Fifteen governing bodies had more men than women - up to a ratio of 5:1. Very few partnerships reported sex-disaggregated data in their annual reports or coverage/impact results. The majority of partnerships focused their work on maternal and child health and infectious and communicable diseases - none addressed non-communicable diseases (NCDs) directly, despite the strong role that gender plays in determining risk for the major NCD burdens. We propose two areas of action in response to these findings. First, GPPPH need to become serious in how they "do" gender; it needs to be mainstreamed through the regular activities, deliverables and systems of accountability. Second, the entire global health community needs to pay greater attention to tackling the major burden of NCDs, including addressing the gendered nature of risk. Given the inherent conflicts of interest in tackling the determinants of many NCDs, it is debatable whether the emergent GPPPH model will be an appropriate one for addressing NCDs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 297 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 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Unknown 137 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Researcher 12 9%
Other 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 43 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 33 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 50 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 213. 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 09 March 2018.
All research outputs
#182,758
of 25,396,120 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#18
of 1,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,832
of 324,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,396,120 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 324,661 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.