| Title |
Deadly AIDS policy failure by the highest levels of the US government: A personal look back 30 years later for lessons to respond better to future epidemics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2012.14 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Donald P Francis |
| Abstract |
Successful control of any dangerous epidemic requires: (i) early understanding of the epidemiology of the disease and (ii) rapid applications of preventive interventions. Through the lack of both policy and financial support, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was severely handicapped during the early years of the AIDS epidemic. Senior staff of the Reagan Administration did not understand the essential role of Government in disease prevention. Although CDC clearly documented the dangers of HIV and AIDS early in the epidemic, refusal by the White House to deliver prevention programs then certainly allowed HIV to become more widely seeded. As much of the international health community relies on CDC for up-to-date prevention advice, these actions by the White House surely increased the spread of HIV around the world. To respond better to future epidemics, we need to understand the deadly forces that inhibited CDC at that time. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 States | 8 | 30% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 17 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 7% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 15 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 7 | 16% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 217. 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 05 April 2024.
All research outputs
#181,083
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#9
of 820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#794
of 174,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 174,570 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.