↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacoeconomics and its implication on priority-setting for essential medicines in Tanzania: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Pharmacoeconomics and its implication on priority-setting for essential medicines in Tanzania: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-12-110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amani Thomas Mori, Bjarne Robberstad

Abstract

Due to escalating treatment costs, pharmacoeconomic analysis has been assigned a key role in the quest for increased efficiency in resource allocation for drug therapies in high-income countries. The extent to which pharmacoeconomic analysis is employed in the same role in low-income countries is less well established. This systematic review identifies and briefly describes pharmacoeconomic studies which have been conducted in Tanzania and further assesses their influence in the selection of essential medicines.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 2 2%
Macao 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 102 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 25%
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 28%
Social Sciences 12 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 7%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 19 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 September 2013.
All research outputs
#6,344,153
of 12,409,138 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#501
of 1,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,520
of 127,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,138 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 127,744 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.