↓ Skip to main content

Models for financing the regulation of pharmaceutical promotion

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, July 2012
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Models for financing the regulation of pharmaceutical promotion
Published in
Globalization and Health, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1744-8603-8-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel Lexchin

Abstract

Pharmaceutical companies spend huge sums promoting their products whereas regulation of promotional activities is typically underfinanced. Any option for financing the monitoring and regulation of promotion should adhere to three basic principles: stability, predictability and lack of (perverse) ties between the level of financing and performance. This paper explores the strengths and weaknesses of six different models. All these six models considered here have positive and negative features and none may necessarily be ideal in any particular country. Different countries may choose to utilize a combination of two or more of these models in order to raise sufficient revenue. Financing of regulation of drug promotion should more than pay for itself through the prevention of unnecessary drug costs and the avoidance of adverse health effects due to inappropriate prescribing. However, it involves an initial outlay of money that is currently not being spent and many national governments, in both rich and poor countries, are unwilling to incur extra costs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Thailand 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 46 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 14%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 7 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 29 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,130,851
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#351
of 1,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,786
of 177,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#5
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 177,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 72% of its contemporaries.