| Title |
Thailand’s HIV/AIDS program after weaning-off the global fund’s support
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Walaiporn Patcharanarumol, Noppakun Thammatacharee, Suwat Kittidilokkul, Thitikorn Topothai, Chompoonut Thaichinda, Rapeepong Suphanchaimat, Nakorn Premsri, Viroj Tangcharoensathien |
| Abstract |
Though 85% of financing HIV/AIDS program was domestic resources, Global Fund (GF) programs played a significant role in prevention interventions and treatment for non-Thai Key Affected Populations (KAP) and migrants. As upper-middle income country, Thailand is not eligible for GF support. This study identified the remaining challenges and funding for prevention interventions for Thai and non-Thai KAP and migrants if GF supports were to curtail. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 23% |
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 July 2015.
All research outputs
#5,929,379
of 23,504,998 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,864
of 15,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,072
of 213,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#126
of 289 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,504,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,270 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 213,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 289 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.