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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
How Medical Tourism Enables Preferential Access to Care: Four Patterns from the Canadian Context
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Care Analysis, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10728-015-0312-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeremy Snyder, Rory Johnston, Valorie A. Crooks, Jeff Morgan, Krystyna Adams |
| Abstract |
Medical tourism is the practice of traveling across international borders with the intention of accessing medical care, paid for out-of-pocket. This practice has implications for preferential access to medical care for Canadians both through inbound and outbound medical tourism. In this paper, we identify four patterns of medical tourism with implications for preferential access to care by Canadians: (1) Inbound medical tourism to Canada's public hospitals; (2) Inbound medical tourism to a First Nations reserve; (3) Canadian patients opting to go abroad for medical tourism; and (4) Canadian patients traveling abroad with a Canadian surgeon. These patterns of medical tourism affect preferential access to health care by Canadians by circumventing domestic regulation of care, creating jurisdictional tensions over the provision of health care, and undermining solidarity with the Canadian health system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 26 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 13 | 16% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 12 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 31 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,021,343
of 23,243,271 outputs
Outputs from Health Care Analysis
#34
of 302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,727
of 394,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Care Analysis
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,243,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 302 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 394,770 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 90% 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 4 of them.