| Title |
Research for better health: the Panamanian priority-setting experience and the need for a new process
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-38 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luz Isabel Romero, Cristiane Quental |
| Abstract |
Panama is, economically, the fastest growing country in Central America and is making efforts to improve management mechanisms for research and innovation. However, due to contextual factors, the Panamanian Health Research System is not well developed and is poorly coordinated with the Health System. Likewise, despite recent efforts to define a National Health Research Agenda, implementing this agenda and aligning it with Panamanians' health needs remains difficult. This articles aims to review Panama's experience in health research priority setting by analyzing the fairness of previous prioritization processes in order to promote an agreed-upon national agenda aligned with public health needs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 17% |
| Chile | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 20% |
| Psychology | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
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 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#5,406,986
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#642
of 1,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,644
of 231,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,209 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 231,106 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.