| Title |
History Matters: The Critical Contribution of Historical Analysis to Contemporary Health Policy and Health Care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Care Analysis, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10728-017-0348-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sally Sheard |
| Abstract |
History is popular with health policymakers, if the regularity with which they invoke historical anecdotes to support policy change is used as an indicator. Yet the ways in which they 'use' history vary enormously, as does its impact. This paper explores, from the perspective of a UK academic historian, the development of 'applied' history in health policy. It draws on personal experience of different types and levels of engagement with policymakers, and highlights mechanisms through which this dialogue and partnership can be made more efficient, effective, and intellectually rewarding for all involved. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 5 | 63% |
| Senegal | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
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 | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 10 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 August 2018.
All research outputs
#6,488,436
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Health Care Analysis
#107
of 301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,518
of 327,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Care Analysis
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 301 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 327,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 2 of them.