A Controlled Study of Funding for Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome as Resource Capacity Building in the Health System in Rwanda
Published in
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, May 2012
Because human inmmunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) receives more donor funding globally than that for all other diseases combined, some critics allege this support undermines general health care. This empirical study evaluates the impact of HIV/AIDS funding on the primary health care system in Rwanda. Using a quasi-experimental design, we randomly selected 25 rural health centers (HCs) that started comprehensive HIV/AIDS services from 2002 through 2006 as the intervention group. Matched HCs with no HIV/AIDS services formed the control group. The analysis compared growth in inputs and services between intervention and control HCs with a difference-in-difference analysis in a random-effects model. Intervention HCs performed better than control HCs in most services (seven of nine), although only one of these improvements (Bacille Calmette-Guérin vaccination) reached or approached statistical significance. In conclusion, this six-year controlled study found no adverse effects of the expansion of HIV/AIDS services on non-HIV services among rural health centers in Rwanda.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 23 May 2012.
All research outputs
#1,876,692
of 30,050,033 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
#443
of 10,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,460
of 187,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
#4
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,050,033 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 187,087 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 90% of its contemporaries.
