↓ Skip to main content

Bibliometric trends of health economic evaluation in Sub-Saharan Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Bibliometric trends of health economic evaluation in Sub-Saharan Africa
Published in
Globalization and Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12992-016-0188-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karla Hernandez-Villafuerte, Ryan Li, Karen J. Hofman

Abstract

Collaboration between Sub-Saharan African researchers is important for the generation and transfer of health technology assessment (HTA) evidence, in order to support priority-setting in health. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate collaboration patterns between countries. We conducted a rapid evidence assessment that included a random sample of health economic evaluations carried out in 20 countries (Angola, Botswana, Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Uganda). We conducted bibliometric network analysis based on all first authors with a Sub-Saharan African academic affiliation and their co-authored publications ("network-articles"). Then we produced a connection map of collaboration patterns among Sub-Saharan African researchers, reflecting the number of network-articles and the country of affiliation of the main co-authors. The sample of 119 economic evaluations mostly related to treatments of communicable diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS (42/119, 35.29 %) and malaria (26/119, 21.85 %). The 39 first authors from Sub-Saharan African institutions together co-authored 729 network-articles. The network analysis showed weak collaboration between health economic researchers in Sub-Saharan Africa, with researchers being more likely to collaborate with Europe and North America than with other African countries. South Africa stood out as producing the highest number of health economic evaluations and collaborations. The development and evaluation of HTA research networks in Sub-Saharan Africa should be supported, with South Africa central to any such efforts. Organizations and institutions from high income countries interested in supporting priority setting in Sub-Saharan Africa should include promoting collaboration as part of their agendas, in order to take advantage of the potential transferability of results and methods of the available health economic analyses in Africa and internationally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Researcher 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Librarian 6 5%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 39 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 20%
Social Sciences 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 5%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 42 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,734,241
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#773
of 1,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,630
of 341,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 341,481 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.