↓ Skip to main content

Non-communicable diseases: mapping research funding organisations, funding mechanisms and research practices in Italy and Germany

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Non-communicable diseases: mapping research funding organisations, funding mechanisms and research practices in Italy and Germany
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12961-017-0249-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victor Stephani, Silvia Sommariva, Anne Spranger, Oriana Ciani

Abstract

Evidence shows that territorial borders continue to have an impact on research collaboration in Europe. Knowledge of national research structural contexts is therefore crucial to the promotion of Europe-wide policies for research funding. Nevertheless, studies assessing and comparing research systems remain scarce. This paper aims to further the knowledge on national research landscapes in Europe, focusing on non-communicable disease (NCD) research in Italy and Germany. To capture the architecture of country-specific research funding systems, a three-fold strategy was adopted. First, a literature review was conducted to determine a list of key public, voluntary/private non-profit and commercial research funding organisations (RFOs). Second, an electronic survey was administered qualifying RFOs. Finally, survey results were integrated with semi-structured interviews with key opinion leaders in NCD research. Three major dimensions of interest were investigated - funding mechanisms, funding patterns and expectations regarding outputs. The number of RFOs in Italy is four times larger than that in Germany and the Italian research system has more project funding instruments than the German system. Regarding the funding patterns towards NCD areas, in both countries, respiratory disease research resulted as the lowest funded, whereas cancer research was the target of most funding streams. The most reported expected outputs of funded research activity were scholarly publication of articles and reports. This cross-country comparison on the Italian and German research funding structures revealed substantial differences between the two systems. The current system is prone to duplicated research efforts, popular funding for some diseases and intransparency of research results. Future research will require addressing the need for better coordination of research funding efforts, even more so if European research efforts are to play a greater role.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Computer Science 2 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 14 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 06 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,372,432
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#868
of 1,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,956
of 332,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#25
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 332,501 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.