↓ Skip to main content

Effects of social programs on indigent population health: Evidence from results-based budgeting's impact evaluations to social programs in Peru.

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 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
Effects of social programs on indigent population health: Evidence from results-based budgeting's impact evaluations to social programs in Peru.
Published in
Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, October 2017
DOI 10.17843/rpmesp.2017.343.3063
Pubmed ID
Authors

Denice Cavero-Arguedas, Viviana Cruzado de la Vega, Gabriela Cuadra-Carrasco

Abstract

This article describes the experience of the MEF's impact evaluation management as one of the RBB instruments and documents the design and results obtained from three impact evaluations of the most emblematic government social programs. The Service of Visiting Families (SAF) of the National Program "Cuna Mas", conditional cash transfer Program "JUNTOS" and National Program "Pension 65" focusing on objective population's health the outcomes. Among the main results, it was found the SAF generated improvements in cognitive and communication development in children, but had no impact on mothers' child care practices or children's nutritional status. In the case of JUNTOS, there were increases in per capita spending, food expenditure, decreases in severity and poverty gap, increases in school attendance and reductions of school dropout. However, no significant results were found in most indicators of prenatal health, child health, or chronic malnutrition. In the case of Pension 65, there were increases in household consumption and improvements in elderly's emotional health (depression, self valoration); but there was no evidence of increases in the use of health services by the elderly or improvements in their physical health. Therefore, it is recommended that such programs boost their designs and inter-sectoral coordination with MINSA and subnational institutions, in order to improve contents of healthy practices and child care, and optimize the provision of health and education services, in order to meet the demands of their users.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 191 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Researcher 10 5%
Student > Master 10 5%
Professor 7 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 3%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 107 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 18 9%
Social Sciences 17 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 113 59%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#8,538,940
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública
#79
of 458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,675
of 333,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 458 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 333,675 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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.