↓ Skip to main content

Lessons for achieving health equity comparing Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States

Overview of attention for article published in Health Policy, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
24 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
2 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
275 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.
Article details
Title
Lessons for achieving health equity comparing Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States
Published in
Health Policy, June 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.05.001
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Aotearoa/New Zealand (Aotearoa/NZ) and the United States (U.S.) suffer inequities in health outcomes by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. This paper compares both countries' approaches to health equity to inform policy efforts. We developed a conceptual model that highlights how government and private policies influence health equity by impacting the healthcare system (access to care, structure and quality of care, payment of care), and integration of healthcare system with social services. These policies are shaped by each country's culture, history, and values. Aotearoa/NZ and U.S. share strong aspirational goals for health equity in their national health strategy documents. Unfortunately, implemented policies are frequently not explicit in how they address health inequities, and often do not align with evidence-based approaches known to improve equity. To authentically commit to achieving health equity, nations should: 1) Explicitly design quality of care and payment policies to achieve equity, holding the healthcare system accountable through public monitoring and evaluation, and supporting with adequate resources; 2) Address all determinants of health for individuals and communities with coordinated approaches, integrated funding streams, and shared accountability metrics across health and social sectors; 3) Share power authentically with racial/ethnic minorities and promote indigenous peoples' self-determination; 4) Have free, frank, and fearless discussions about impacts of structural racism, colonialism, and white privilege, ensuring that policies and programs explicitly address root causes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 275 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Master 24 9%
Researcher 24 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 36 13%
Unknown 126 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 43 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 12%
Social Sciences 23 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 2%
Other 31 11%
Unknown 134 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 62. 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 24 January 2023.
All research outputs
#863,404
of 34,335,254 outputs
Outputs from Health Policy
#71
of 3,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,128
of 374,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Policy
#2
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,335,254 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,342 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 374,687 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.