| Title |
Improving access to care in low and middle-income countries: institutional factors related to enrollment and patient outcome in a cancer drug access program
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-13-304 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ebru Tekinturhan, Etienne Audureau, Marie-Pierre Tavolacci, Patricia Garcia-Gonzalez, Joël Ladner, Joseph Saba |
| Abstract |
Limited access to drugs is a crucial barrier to reducing the growing impact of cancer in low- and middle-income countries. Approaches based on drug donations or adaptive pricing strategies yield promising but varying results across countries or programs, The Glivec International Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP) is a program designed to provide imatinib free of charge to patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). The objective of this work was to identify institutional factors associated with enrollment and patient survival in GIPAP. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 24% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 August 2013.
All research outputs
#18,343,746
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,441
of 7,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,816
of 197,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#82
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 197,401 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.