↓ Skip to main content

Comparative assessment of medicine procurement prices in the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 134)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Comparative assessment of medicine procurement prices in the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/2052-3211-7-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaret Ewen, Maisa Al Sakit, Rawan Saadeh, Richard Laing, Catherine Vialle-Valentin, Akihiro Seita, Joske Bunders

Abstract

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the main primary healthcare provider for 4.9 million Palestinian refugees, spent USD18.3 million on essential medicines dispensed free-of-charge through clinics in five areas of operation ('fields'): Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank (2010). Faced with budget contraints and an increasing demand for medicines to treat chronic conditions, the objective of our study was to assess UNRWA's medicine procurement prices to see if savings could be possible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 38%
Researcher 9 21%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Professor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 31%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 10%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 6 14%

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 01 June 2016.
All research outputs
#1,855,404
of 9,037,906 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#39
of 134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,800
of 204,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,037,906 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 134 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 204,567 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.