↓ Skip to main content

Scoping literature review on the basic health benefit package and its determinant criteria

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, March 2018
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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Scoping literature review on the basic health benefit package and its determinant criteria
Published in
Globalization and Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12992-018-0345-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ramin Hayati, Peivand Bastani, Mohammad Javad Kabir, Zahra Kavosi, Ghasem Sobhani

Abstract

There are various criteria and methods to develop Basic Health Benefit Package (BHBP) in world health systems. The present study aimed to extract criteria used in health systems in different countries around the world using scoping review method. A systematic search was carried out in Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science, ProQuest, World Bank, World Health Organization, and Google databases between January and April 2016. Papers and reports were gathered according to selected keywords and were examined by two authors. Finally, the criteria were extracted from the selected papers. The primary search included 8876 papers. After studying the articles' titles, abstracts, and full texts, 9 articles and 14 reports were selected for final analysis. After the final analysis, 19 criteria were extracted. Due to diversity of criteria in terms of number and nature, they were divided into three categories. The categories included intervention-related criteria, disease-related criteria, and community-related criteria. The largest number of criteria belonged to the first category. Indeed, the most widely applied criteria included cost-effectiveness (20), effectiveness (19), budget impact (12), equity (12), and burden of disease (10). According to the results, different criteria were identified in terms of number and nature in developing BHBP in world health systems. It seems that certain criteria, such as cost-effectiveness, effectiveness, budget impact, burden of disease, equity, and necessity, that were most widely utilized in countries under study could be for designing BHBP with regard to social, cultural, and economic considerations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 17%
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 6 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 29 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 04 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,699,388
of 25,271,884 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#273
of 1,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,124
of 337,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#10
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,271,884 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,218 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 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 337,814 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 73% of its contemporaries.