↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare reform in the United States and China: pharmaceutical market implications

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 127)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Healthcare reform in the United States and China: pharmaceutical market implications
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/2052-3211-7-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arthur Daemmrich, Ansuman Mohanty

Abstract

The United States and China are broadening health insurance coverage and increasing spending on pharmaceuticals, in contrast to other major economies that are reducing health spending and implementing a variety of drug price controls. This article analyzes the implications of health system reforms in the United States and China for national pharmaceutical markets. It follows a historical institutionalist approach that identifies path dependency in the design and operation of national health systems. On that basis, we estimate prescription sales for 2015 and 2020, analyze the sustainability of free-market pricing for drugs in the two countries, and assess future competitive dynamics in the pharmaceutical sector.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 30%
Student > Master 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 8 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 30%
Social Sciences 11 25%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Other 8 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 23 April 2015.
All research outputs
#612,094
of 8,702,492 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#9
of 127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,056
of 180,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,702,492 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 180,524 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them