| Title |
Are We Producing the Right Kind of Actionable Evidence for the Social Determinants of Health?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11524-012-9695-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patricia O’Campo |
| Abstract |
Globally, health and social inequities are growing and are created, actively maintained, and aggravated by existing policies and practices. The call for evidence-based policy making to address this injustice seems a promising strategy to facilitate a reversal of existing strategies and the design of new effective programming. Acting on evidence to address inequities requires congruence between identifying the major drivers of disparities and the study of their causes and solutions. Yet, current research on inequities tends to focus on documenting disparities among individuals or subpopulations with little focus on identifying the macro-social causes of adverse population health. Moreover, the research base falls far short of a focus on the solutions to the complex multilevel drivers of disparities. This paper focuses upon recommendations to refocus and improve the public health research evidence generated to inform and create strong evidence-based recommendations for improving population health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 25% |
| Unknown | 14 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 27 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Decision Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 April 2014.
All research outputs
#16,136,370
of 24,546,092 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#1,138
of 1,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,897
of 169,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#42
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,546,092 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 169,612 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.