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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Cobertura da Estratégia de Saúde da Família (ESF) no Brasil, segundo a Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde, 2013
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1413-81232015212.23602015 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Deborah Carvalho Malta, Maria Aline Siqueira Santos, Sheila Rizzato Stopa, José Eudes Barroso Vieira, Eduardo Alves Melo, Ademar Arthur Chioro dos Reis |
| Abstract |
Objective to present Family Health Strategy (ESF) coverage according to the National Health Survey (PNS), comparing to administrative data and previous coverage of the National Household Sample Survey (PNAD 2008), and describe the frequencies of home visiting teams. Methods it was compared data from 2013 according to PNS and data from the Ministry of Health and the National Household Sample Survey (PNAD 2008). Home visiting indicators of PNS were stratified by education and Major Regions. Results the proportion of households registered in Family Health Teams in Brazil was 53.4% (95%CI: 52.1-54.6), being higher in rural areas and in the Northeast. The proportion of residents in registered households was 56.2%, similar to the Ministry of Health (56.4%) and showed growth compared to PNAD 2008 (50.9%). There was variation between regions, UF and capitals. People with lower education level have received more home visiting monthly. Discussion the ESF is an important promoter of health equity and its coverage and scope increase is successful in the country. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 1% |
| Unknown | 282 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 74 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 39 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 21 | 7% |
| Professor | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 13% |
| Unknown | 76 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 100 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 45 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Engineering | 6 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 33 | 12% |
| Unknown | 82 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#22,778,604
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#1,776
of 2,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#348,012
of 406,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#30
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,038 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 406,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.