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 |
Is “associativism” good for one's health? The case of rare diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1413-81232018232.24032017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rogério Lima Barbosa, Sílvia Portugal |
| Abstract |
Based on the question of an inspiring work - "Is the Market good for one's Health?", this paper poses a similar question, centered on "associativism" (belonging to a labor group or association) and the field of rare diseases. Starting from the research carried out in the scope of the Master's Degree in Sociology of the School of Economics of the University of Coimbra, this text puts into perspective the formulations created for the field of genetic conditions that, mainly, depart from a Eurocentric vision. The field of rare diseases is analyzed, identifying the roles, relationships and motivations of the different actors, namely, civil associations, pharmaceutical industry, academy, government, and families. The analysis highlights the preponderance of the market and the production of medicines, identifying a governance model - Utility Model of Care - in which the person who suffers and his/her family are left devoid of their subjectivity and transmuted into medication and market agents. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Librarian | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 5 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
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 20 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,600,606
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#355
of 2,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,245
of 448,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#3
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,037 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 448,849 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.