↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between financial speculation and food prices or price volatility: applying the principles of evidence-based medicine to current debates in Germany

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Relationship between financial speculation and food prices or price volatility: applying the principles of evidence-based medicine to current debates in Germany
Published in
Globalization and Health, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1744-8603-9-44
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kayvan Bozorgmehr, Sabine Gabrysch, Olaf Müller, Florian Neuhann, Irmgard Jordan, Michael Knipper, Oliver Razum

Abstract

There is an unresolved debate about the potential effects of financial speculation on food prices and price volatility. Germany's largest financial institution and leading global investment bank recently decided to continue investing in agricultural commodities, stating that there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that the growth of agricultural-based financial products has caused price increases or volatility. The statement is supported by a recently published literature review, which concludes that financial speculation does not have an adverse effect on the functioning of the agricultural commodities market. As public health professionals concerned with global food insecurity, we have appraised the methodological quality of the review using a validated and reliable appraisal tool. The appraisal revealed major shortcomings in the methodological quality of the review. These were particularly related to intransparencies in the search strategy and in the selection/presentation of studies and findings; the neglect of the possibility of publication bias; a lack of objective or rigorous criteria for assessing the scientific quality of included studies and for the formulation of conclusions. Based on the results of our appraisal, we conclude that it is not justified to reject the hypothesis that financial speculation might have adverse effects on food prices/price volatility. We hope to initiate reflections about scientific standards beyond the boundaries of disciplines and call for high quality, rigorous systematic reviews on the effects of financial speculation on food prices or price volatility.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Master 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Social Sciences 4 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 January 2014.
All research outputs
#14,119,301
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#915
of 1,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,569
of 210,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 210,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.