| Title |
In the Name of Global Health: Trends in Academic Institutions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, December 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2008.25 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah B Macfarlane, Marian Jacobs, Ephata E Kaaya |
| Abstract |
This paper describes accelerating development of programs in global health, particularly in North American academic institutions, and sets this phenomenon in the context of earlier programs in tropical medicine and international health that originated predominantly in Europe. Like these earlier programs, the major focus of the new global health programs is on the health needs of developing countries, and perhaps for this reason, few similar programs have emerged in academic institutions in the developing countries themselves. If global health is about the improvement of health worldwide, the reduction of disparities, and protection of societies against global threats that disregard national borders, it is essential that academic institutions reach across geographic, cultural, economic, gender, and linguistic boundaries to develop mutual understanding of the scope of global health and to create collaborative education and research programs. One indication of success would be emergence of a new generation of truly global leaders working on a shared and well-defined agenda--and doing so on equal footing. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Sierra Leone | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 241 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 61 | 24% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 49 | 19% |
| Unknown | 54 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 52 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 45 | 18% |
| Unknown | 59 | 23% |
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 07 March 2023.
All research outputs
#6,653,697
of 23,504,445 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#312
of 800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,948
of 168,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,504,445 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 800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 168,083 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 73% of its contemporaries.
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.