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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Stakeholders’ perspectives on access-to-medicines policy and research priorities in Latin America and the Caribbean: face-to-face and web-based interviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-31 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thiago Botelho Azeredo, Vera Lucia Luiza, Maria Auxiliadora Oliveira, Isabel Cristina Martins Emmerick, Maryam Bigdeli |
| Abstract |
This study aims to rank policy concerns and policy-related research issues in order to identify policy and research gaps on access to medicines (ATM) in low- and middle-income countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), as perceived by policy makers, researchers, NGO and international organization representatives, as part of a global prioritization exercise. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 102 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 18% |
| Researcher | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 20% |
| Unknown | 24 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 26 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 July 2014.
All research outputs
#12,840,034
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#922
of 1,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,970
of 227,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,209 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 227,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.