↓ Skip to main content

Health needs of the rural population in environmental conflict due to the installation of Irrigated Perimeters

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Health needs of the rural population in environmental conflict due to the installation of Irrigated Perimeters
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, May 2018
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232018235.05022016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrezza Graziella Veríssimo Pontes, Raquel Maria Rigotto, Jennifer Vale Silva

Abstract

The transformations in the Brazilian agricultural scenario have reconfigured lifestyles in the countryside, with repercussions on the health of the rural population. The scope of this paper is to analyze health needs of farmers, identified by a collective of university actors, the Unified Health System and social movements. It is action-research, with a group comprised of community health workers, workers in a Reference Center in Occupational Health, a university professor and representatives of social movements. Semi-structured interviews and field visits were conducted, as well as workshops and seminars. The thematic categorization revealed five health need groupings: the need for revision of the agrarian development model; the need for good living conditions; the need for social mobilization; the need to avoid the use of pesticides; and the need for action of the Unified Health System (SUS). The dialogue of knowledge and exchange of experience elicited the recognition of health needs that require intersectoral action. Health needs must be understood in the context of the territories to which the individuals and groups belong, acknowledging the complexity of social, economic, cultural and environmental issues.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 19%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor 2 6%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 6 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 9 25%
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 12 June 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
#105,989
of 339,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#26
of 54 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 339,234 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.