↓ Skip to main content

The role of South-North partnerships in promoting shared learning and knowledge transfer

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, August 2017
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
The role of South-North partnerships in promoting shared learning and knowledge transfer
Published in
Globalization and Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12992-017-0289-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lopa Basu, Peter Pronovost, Nancy Edwards Molello, Shamsuzzoha B. Syed, Albert W. Wu

Abstract

While it is clear that hospitals in developing countries need to improve quality of health services and improve patient safety, hospitals in high resource countries need to do the same. Most often the focus on improvement through institutional health partnerships involves hospital teams from high resource settings attempting to aid and teach hospital staff in low resource settings, particularly in Africa. However these efforts to provide assistance may be more satisfying and sustainable if we understand that partnership learning is bi-directional whereby hospital teams from high resource settings also benefit. One particular partnership-based model that demonstrates this benefit to high resource partners is the World Health Organization African Partnerships for Patient Safety (APPS). Johns Hopkins Medicine Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety & Quality (AI) through the APPS model has co-created twinning partnerships with hospitals in Uganda, South Sudan & Liberia. This commentary aims to deconstruct specific learnings that have benefited the Johns Hopkins AI community through the APPS partnership.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 10%
Engineering 4 6%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 26 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 02 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,621,423
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#428
of 1,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,878
of 317,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#10
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 317,366 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 68% of its contemporaries.