↓ Skip to main content

Health, equity and the post-2015 agenda: raising the voices of marginalized communities

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2014
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Health, equity and the post-2015 agenda: raising the voices of marginalized communities
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12939-014-0082-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Lorena Ruano, Eric A Friedman, Peter S Hill

Abstract

In September 2012 the United Nations (UN) initiated a process that would extend and enhance the unfinished agenda of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), integrating a new vision for sustainable development beyond the year 2015. The initial consultation phase has been completed, with the UN and partner organizations undertaking eleven thematic consultations, including one on health. It is in this context that the European Commission (EC) has tasked the research consortium Goals and Governance for Global Health (Go4Health) with providing recommendations for the post-2015 health-related development goals and including voices that are routinely excluded from health-related decision-making processes. This has not been an easy task. It has led us to question how to define marginalization, how to access marginalized communities, as well as how community members could provide informed consent. The context of the communities we worked with was far removed from the reality of the post-2015 debates, where the MDGs and the new goals, are remote and abstract, and where the promise of immediate benefit from participation could not be assured. Given the social, historical, cultural, ethnic and geographical diversity of our chosen community partners, and the diversity of their lived experiences, could their unique situations be generalized in ways that could influence the global debate? In this special issue, we have tried to explore the uniqueness and the commonalities of the issues and barriers that marginalized communities face all over the globe, and present them in individual papers that, together, provide a nuanced and complex picture of the challenges that face the post-2015 health-related agenda setting-process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 76 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 20%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 16 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Social Sciences 12 15%
Psychology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 19 24%
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 15 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,866,307
of 25,393,071 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#503
of 2,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,977
of 268,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#10
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,393,071 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 2,229 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 268,412 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.