The article examines the process of discursive construction of the 'SUS problem' in reports published in the newspaper Folha de S. Paulo in 2008. Through an online search of the Folha archives, 667 news items were selected and then studied from the perspectives of critical discourse analysis and contributions from social constructionism. In methodological terms, at the text practice level of analysis, the investigation sought to determine what linguistic resources had been used to construct the SUS problem. At the discursive practice level of analysis, it further explored how the newspaper medium and the journalistic style influenced the production of these meanings. The article concludes that as this production constructs the SUS problem, it fosters a limited, negative view of the the Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Healthcare System, or SUS) based on mistrust and on the notion that it is impossible to improve the system.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
1
6%
Other
4
22%
Unknown
4
22%
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 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,971,164
of 27,370,655 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#549
of 1,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,753
of 212,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,370,655 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 212,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
