↓ Skip to main content

Assessing policy dialogues and the role of context: Liberian case study before and during the Ebola outbreak

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Assessing policy dialogues and the role of context: Liberian case study before and during the Ebola outbreak
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1454-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juliet Nabyonga-Orem, Mesfin Gebrikidane, Aziza Mwisongo

Abstract

In the last decade participatory approaches have gained prominence in policy-making, becoming the focus of good policy-making processes. Policy dialogue is recognised as an important aspect of policy-making among several interactive and innovative policy-making models applied in different contexts and sectors. Recently there has been emphasis on the quality of policy dialogue in terms of how it should be conducted to attain participation and inclusiveness. However, there is paucity of evidence on how the context influences policy dialogue, particularly participation of stakeholders. Liberia's context, which is characterised as post-war, highly donor dependent and in recovery from the recent catastrophic Ebola outbreak, provides an opportunity to understand the influence of context on policy dialogue. This was an exploratory study using qualitative methods. Key informant interviews were conducted using an interview guide. A total of 16 interviews were conducted, 12 at the national level and 4 at the sub national level. Data were analysed using inductive thematic content analysis. The respondents felt that the dialogues were a success and involved important stakeholders; however, there were concerns about the improper methodology and facilitation used to conduct them. Opinions among the respondents about the process of generating and selecting the themes for the dialogues were extremely divergent. Both before and during the Ebola outbreak, the context was instrumental in shaping the dialogues according to the issue of focus, requirements for participation and the decisions to be made. Policy dialogues have become a platform for policy discussions and decisions in Liberia. It is a process that is well recognised and appreciated and is highly attributed to the success of the negotiations during the Ebola outbreak. To sustain and strengthen policy dialogues in future, there needs to be proper information sharing through diverse forums and avenues, stakeholders' empowerment and competent facilitation. These will ensure that the process is credible and legitimate.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 87 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 18%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 20 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 23 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,741,552
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,321
of 7,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,995
of 363,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#138
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 363,209 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.