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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Strategies for achieving global collective action on antimicrobial resistance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of the World Health Organization, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2471/blt.15.153171 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steven J Hoffman, Grazia M Caleo, Nils Daulaire, Stefan Elbe, Precious Matsoso, Elias Mossialos, Zain Rizvi, John-Arne Røttingen |
| Abstract |
Global governance and market failures mean that it is not possible to ensure access to antimicrobial medicines of sustainable effectiveness. Many people work to overcome these failures, but their institutions and initiatives are insufficiently coordinated, led and financed. Options for promoting global collective action on antimicrobial access and effectiveness include building institutions, crafting incentives and mobilizing interests. No single option is sufficient to tackle all the challenges associated with antimicrobial resistance. Promising institutional options include monitored milestones and an inter-agency task force. A global pooled fund could be used to craft incentives and a special representative nominated as an interest mobilizer. There are three policy components to the problem of antimicrobials - ensuring access, conservation and innovation. To address all three components, the right mix of options needs to be matched with an effective forum and may need to be supported by an international legal framework. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 3% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 54 | 81% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 55 | 82% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 19 September 2022.
All research outputs
#4,449,278
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#40
of 286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,881
of 292,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 292,465 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.