↓ Skip to main content

Improving health in cities through systems approaches for urban water management

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 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
Improving health in cities through systems approaches for urban water management
Published in
Environmental Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12940-016-0107-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. C. Rietveld, J. G. Siri, I. Chakravarty, A. M. Arsénio, R. Biswas, A. Chatterjee

Abstract

As human populations become more and more urban, decision-makers at all levels face new challenges related to both the scale of service provision and the increasing complexity of cities and the networks that connect them. These challenges may take on unique aspects in cities with different cultures, political and institutional frameworks, and at different levels of development, but they frequently have in common an origin in the interaction of human and environmental systems and the feedback relationships that govern their dynamic evolution. Accordingly, systems approaches are becoming recognized as critical to understanding and addressing such complex problems, including those related to human health and wellbeing. Management of water resources in and for cities is one area where such approaches hold real promise. This paper seeks to summarize links between water and health in cities and outline four main elements of systems approaches: analytic methods to deal with complexity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and multi-scale thinking. Using case studies from a range of urban socioeconomic and regional contexts (Maputo, Mozambique; Surat and Kolkata, India; and Vienna, Austria). We show how the inclusion of these elements can lead to better research design, more effective policy and better outcomes.

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 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 153 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 19%
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 25 16%
Social Sciences 21 14%
Engineering 15 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 45 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 23 May 2020.
All research outputs
#5,567,202
of 25,795,662 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#764
of 1,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,855
of 314,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#21
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,795,662 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 314,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.