↓ Skip to main content

Modalidades de gestão de serviços no Sistema Único de Saúde: revisão narrativa da produção científica da Saúde Coletiva no Brasil (2005-2016)

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Modalidades de gestão de serviços no Sistema Único de Saúde: revisão narrativa da produção científica da Saúde Coletiva no Brasil (2005-2016)
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, April 2018
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00114217
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Franco Ravioli, Patrícia Coelho De Soárez, Mário César Scheffer

Abstract

The current study aimed to systematically analyze trends and priorities in the theoretical and conceptual approaches and empirical studies on specific health services management modalities in the Brazilian Unified National Health System. A narrative review of the literature identified, in 33 publications, the location and nature of services, management models, methodological procedures, and study outcomes. The research deals mainly with the models' conceptual and legal characteristics and management practices, in addition to addressing contracts, procurement, human resources, financing, and control mechanisms. In conclusion, the literature is limited and concentrated in the State of São Paulo, showing little theoretical diversity and methodological weaknesses, while it is nonconclusive as to the superiority of one management model over another. New evaluation studies are needed that are capable of comparing different models and assessing their performance and their effects on the quality of health services' provision, the population's health, and the health system's organization.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 28%
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 14%
Social Sciences 5 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Psychology 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 9 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 May 2018.
All research outputs
#8,150,551
of 12,996,278 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#54
of 117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,835
of 271,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,996,278 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 117 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 271,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.