↓ Skip to main content

Strategies for integrating primary health services in low- and middle-income countries at the point of delivery

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
567 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Strategies for integrating primary health services in low- and middle-income countries at the point of delivery
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003318.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lilian Dudley, Paul Garner

Abstract

In some low- and middle-income countries, separate vertical programmes deliver specific life-saving interventions but can fragment services. Strategies to integrate services aim to bring together inputs, organisation, and delivery of particular functions to increase efficiency and people's access. We examined the evidence on the effectiveness of integration strategies at the point of delivery (sometimes termed 'linkages'), including integrated delivery of tuberculosis (TB), HIV/AIDS and reproductive health programmes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 567 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 1%
Canada 4 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Rwanda 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 541 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 125 22%
Researcher 116 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 11%
Student > Postgraduate 37 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 37 7%
Other 129 23%
Unknown 59 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 230 41%
Social Sciences 83 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 58 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 22 4%
Psychology 21 4%
Other 72 13%
Unknown 81 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 07 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,245,365
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,406
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,910
of 80,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 80,085 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.