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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The influence of the rural health security schemes on health utilization and household impoverishment in rural China: data from a household survey of western and central China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal for Equity in Health, February 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-9276-9-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wuxiang Shi, Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong, Alan Geater, Junhua Zhang, Hong Zhang, Daniele Brombal |
| Abstract |
The New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme (NRCMS, voluntary health insurance) and the Medical Financial Assistance (MFA, financial relief program) were established in 2003 for rural China. The aim of this study was to document their coverage, assess their effectiveness on access to in-patient care and protection against financial catastrophe and household impoverishment due to health spending, and identify the factors predicting impoverishment with and without these schemes. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 21% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 21% |
| Unknown | 15 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 20 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 27% |
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 01 January 2013.
All research outputs
#7,801,448
of 23,685,936 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,199
of 1,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,539
of 95,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,685,936 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,980 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 95,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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