↓ Skip to main content

Using a community-based definition of poverty for targeting poor households for premium subsidies in the context of a community health insurance in Burkina Faso

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2015
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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
Using a community-based definition of poverty for targeting poor households for premium subsidies in the context of a community health insurance in Burkina Faso
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-014-1335-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Germain Savadogo, Aurelia Souarès, Ali Sié, Divya Parmar, Gilles Bibeau, Rainer Sauerborn

Abstract

One of the biggest challenges in subsidizing premiums of poor households for community health insurance is the identification and selection of these households. Generally, poverty assessments in developing countries are based on monetary terms. The household is regarded as poor if its income or consumption is lower than a predefined poverty cut-off. These measures fail to recognize the multi-dimensional character of poverty, ignoring community members' perception and understanding of poverty, leaving them voiceless and powerless in the identification process. Realizing this, the steering committee of Nouna's health insurance devised a method to involve community members to better define 'perceived' poverty, using this as a key element for the poor selection. The community-identified poor were then used to effectively target premium subsidies for the insurance scheme.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 133 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 13%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 21%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 15 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 6%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 42 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 April 2020.
All research outputs
#3,616,991
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,966
of 14,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,708
of 352,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#56
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 352,155 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 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 74% of its contemporaries.