| Title |
How a Bottom-Up Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Helped Transform the Renal Replacement Therapy Landscape in Spain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40258-017-0315-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rafael Selgas, Laura Rodriguez, Juan Carlos Julian, Cesar Remon, Mario Prieto-Velasco, Javier Perez-Contreras, Miguel Perez Fontan, GADDPE |
| Abstract |
Healthcare reforms aim to change certain parts of the health system to improve quality of care, access, or financial sustainability. Traditionally, healthcare reform is understood as an action undertaken by a government at a national or local level. However, bottom-up changes can also lead to improvements in the health system. This paper describes the efforts of a coordinated multi-stakeholder advocacy group in Spain to promote a more cost-effective and patient-centred treatment for people receiving renal replacement therapy and assesses the outcomes of their advocacy for health system financing and patient satisfaction. It concludes that bottom-up initiatives do indeed have the power to change health policy and that policy makers should pay attention to their arguments. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Librarian | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 18% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 45% |
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 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,448,846
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#553
of 784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,593
of 311,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#14
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 311,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.