↓ Skip to main content

Primary Health Care as a Foundation for Strengthening Health Systems in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
39 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
173 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
500 Mendeley
Title
Primary Health Care as a Foundation for Strengthening Health Systems in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3898-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Asaf Bitton, Hannah L. Ratcliffe, Jeremy H. Veillard, Daniel H. Kress, Shannon Barkley, Meredith Kimball, Federica Secci, Ethan Wong, Lopa Basu, Chelsea Taylor, Jaime Bayona, Hong Wang, Gina Lagomarsino, Lisa R. Hirschhorn

Abstract

Primary health care (PHC) has been recognized as a core component of effective health systems since the early part of the twentieth century. However, despite notable progress, there remains a large gap between what individuals and communities need, and the quality and effectiveness of care delivered. The Primary Health Care Performance Initiative (PHCPI) was established by an international consortium to catalyze improvements in PHC delivery and outcomes in low- and middle-income countries through better measurement and sharing of effective models and practices. PHCPI has developed a framework to illustrate the relationship between key financing, workforce, and supply inputs, and core primary health care functions of first-contact accessibility, comprehensiveness, coordination, continuity, and person-centeredness. The framework provides guidance for more effective assessment of current strengths and gaps in PHC delivery through a core set of 25 key indicators ("Vital Signs"). Emerging best practices that foster high-performing PHC system development are being codified and shared around low- and high-income countries. These measurement and improvement approaches provide countries and implementers with tools to assess the current state of their PHC delivery system and to identify where cross-country learning can accelerate improvements in PHC quality and effectiveness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 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 500 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 500 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 83 17%
Researcher 60 12%
Student > Bachelor 36 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 7%
Student > Postgraduate 29 6%
Other 86 17%
Unknown 172 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 115 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 13%
Social Sciences 52 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 2%
Other 61 12%
Unknown 188 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. 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 22 January 2024.
All research outputs
#687,762
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#538
of 8,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,918
of 422,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,250 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 422,517 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.