↓ Skip to main content

Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
195 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2007
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-7-309
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adnan A Hyder, Gerald Bloom, Melissa Leach, Shamsuzzoha B Syed, David H Peters, Future Health Systems: Innovations for Equity

Abstract

The interface between research and policymaking in low-income countries is highly complex. The ability of health systems research to influence policy processes in such settings face numerous challenges. Successful analysis of the research-policy interface in these settings requires understanding of contextual factors as well as key influences on the interface. Future Health Systems (FHS): Innovations for Equity is a consortium conducting research in six countries in Asia and Africa. One of the three cross-country research themes of the consortium is analysis of the relationship between research (evidence) and policy making, especially their impact on the poor; insights gained in the initial conceptual phase of FHS activities can inform the global knowledge pool on this subject.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Bangladesh 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 173 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 18%
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 6%
Other 39 20%
Unknown 18 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 27%
Social Sciences 46 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 4%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 24 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,932,629
of 23,671,454 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,421
of 15,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,465
of 78,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#11
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,671,454 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 15,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 78,213 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 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.