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 |
Pharmaceutical regulation in Europe and its impact on corporate R&D
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Economics Review, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13561-014-0023-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephan Eger, Jörg C Mahlich |
| Abstract |
Many European countries regulate the markets for prescription drugs in order to cope with rising health expenditures. On the other hand, regulation distorts incentives to invest in pharmaceutical R&D. This study aims at empirically assessing the impact of regulation on pharmaceutical R&D expenditures. We analyze a sample of 20 leading pharmaceutical companies between 2000 and 2008. The share of sales in Europe serves as a proxy for the degree of pharmaceutical regulation. We control for other firm specific determinants of R&D such as cash flow, company size, leverage ratio, growth rate, and Tobin's q. Our results suggest a nonlinear relationship between European sales ratio and R&D intensity. Beyond a threshold of 33% of sales generated in Europe, a higher presence in Europe is associated with lower R&D investments. The results can be interpreted as further evidence of the deteriorating effect of regulation on firm's incentives to invest in R&D. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 13% |
| Qatar | 1 | 13% |
| Spain | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 12% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 7 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Engineering | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 21% |
| Unknown | 24 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 27 January 2023.
All research outputs
#742,456
of 23,207,489 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#10
of 442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,601
of 254,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,207,489 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 254,953 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 96% 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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.