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 |
From institutionalization of user fees to their abolition in West Africa: a story of pilot projects and public policies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-15-s3-s6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valéry Ridde |
| Abstract |
This article analyzes the historical background of the institutionalization of user fees and their subsequent abolition in West Africa. Based on a narrative review, we present the context that frames the different articles in this supplement. We first show that a general consensus has emerged internationally against user fees, which were imposed widely in Africa in the 1980s and 1990s; at that time, the institutionalization of user fees was supported by evidence from pilot projects funded by international aid agencies. Since then there have been other pilot projects studying the abolition of user fees in the 2000s, but these have not yet had any real influence on public policies, which are often still chaotic. This perplexing situation might be explained more by ideologies and political will than by insufficient financial capacity of states. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Mali | 1 | 14% |
| India | 1 | 14% |
| South Africa | 1 | 14% |
| Senegal | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 18% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 20 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 July 2020.
All research outputs
#4,330,843
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,012
of 7,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,761
of 287,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#20
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 287,308 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.