| Title |
A quiet revolution in global public health: The World Health Organization’s Prequalification of Medicines Programme
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2013.53 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ellen F M ‘t Hoen, Hans V Hogerzeil, Jonathan D Quick, Hiiti B Sillo |
| Abstract |
Problems with the quality of medicines abound in countries where regulatory and legal oversight are weak, where medicines are unaffordable to most, and where the official supply often fails to reach patients. Quality is important to ensure effective treatment, to maintain patient and health-care worker confidence in treatment, and to prevent the development of resistance. In 2001, the WHO established the Prequalification of Medicines Programme in response to the need to select good-quality medicines for UN procurement. Member States of the WHO had requested its assistance in assessing the quality of low-cost generic medicines that were becoming increasingly available especially in treatments for HIV/AIDS. From a public health perspective, WHO PQP's greatest achievement is improved quality of life-saving medicines used today by millions of people in developing countries. Prequalification has made it possible to believe that everyone in the world will have access to safe, effective, and affordable medicines. Yet despite its track record and recognized importance to health, funding for the programme remains uncertain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 10 | 20% |
| United States | 10 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 12% |
| France | 3 | 6% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 8% |
| Scientists | 3 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 120 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 32 | 26% |
| Researcher | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 17% |
| Unknown | 21 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 29% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 15 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 15% |
| Unknown | 25 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 09 June 2022.
All research outputs
#805,145
of 25,500,206 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#30
of 815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,501
of 320,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,500,206 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 815 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 320,419 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.