| Title |
What did the Go4Health policy research project contribute to the policy discourse on the sustainable development goals? A reflexive review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Globalization and Health, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12992-018-0367-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vannarath Te, Nadia Floden, Sameera Hussain, Claire E. Brolan, Peter S. Hill |
| Abstract |
In 2012, the European Commission funded Go4Health-Goals and Governance for Global Health, a consortium of 13 academic research and human rights institutions from both Global North and South-to track the evolution of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and provide ongoing policy advice. This paper reviews the research outputs published between 2012 and 2016, analyzing the thematic content of the publications, and the influence on global health and development discourse through citation metrics. Analysis of the 54 published papers showed 6 dominant themes related to the SDGs: the formulation process for the SDG health goal; the right to health; Universal Health Coverage; voices of marginalized peoples; global health governance; and the integration of health across the other SDGs. The papers combined advocacy---particularly for the right to health and its potential embodiment in Universal Health Coverage-with qualitative research and analysis of policy and stakeholders. Go4Health's publications on the right to health, global health governance and the voices of marginalized peoples in relation to the SDGs represented a substantial proportion of papers published for these topics. Go4Health analysis of the right to health clarified its elements and their application to Universal Health Coverage, global health governance, financing the SDGs and access to medicines. Qualitative research identified correspondence between perceptions of marginalized peoples and right to health principles, and reluctance among multilateral organizations to explicitly represent the right to health in the goals, despite their acknowledgement of their importance. Citation metrics analysis confirmed an average of 5.5 citations per paper, with a field-weighted citation impact of 2.24 for the 43 peer reviewed publications. Citations in the academic literature and UN policy documents confirmed the impact of Go4Health on the global discourse around the SDGs, but within the Go4Health consortium there was also evidence of two epistemological frames of analysis-normative legal analysis and empirical research-that created productive synergies in unpacking the health SDG and the right to health. The analysis offers clear evidence for the contribution of funded programmatic research-such as the Go4Health project-to the global health discourse. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 1 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Belgium | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 22% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Librarian | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,477,343
of 25,137,221 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#793
of 1,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,991
of 334,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#24
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,137,221 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 1,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 334,181 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.