↓ Skip to main content

Atenção à saúde de pessoas em situação de rua: estudo comparado de unidades móveis em Portugal, Estados Unidos e Brasil

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Atenção à saúde de pessoas em situação de rua: estudo comparado de unidades móveis em Portugal, Estados Unidos e Brasil
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, March 2017
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232017223.25822016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Igor da Costa Borysow, Eleonor Minho Conill, Juarez Pereira Furtado

Abstract

This paper describes and analyzes the legal and normative framework guiding the use of mobile units in Portugal, United States and Brazil, which seek to improve access and continuity of care for people in homelessness. We used a comparative analysis through literature and documentary review relating three categories: context (demographic, socio-economic and epidemiological), services system (access, coverage, organization, management and financing) and, specifically, mobile units (design, care and financing model). The analysis was based on the theory of convergence/divergence between health systems from the perspective of equity in health. Improving access, addressing psychoactive substances abuse, outreach and multidisciplinary work proved to be common to all three countries, with the potential to reduce inequities. Relationships with primary healthcare, use of vehicles and the type of financing are considered differently in the three countries, influencing the greater or lesser extent of equity in the analyzed proposals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Social Sciences 9 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 15%
Arts and Humanities 3 7%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 15 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,842,267
of 12,892,079 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#125
of 708 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,188
of 257,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,892,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 708 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 257,963 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 91% of its contemporaries.