↓ Skip to main content

Federalismo e políticas de saúde no Brasil: características institucionais e desigualdades regionais

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Federalismo e políticas de saúde no Brasil: características institucionais e desigualdades regionais
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, June 2018
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232018236.07932018
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Mendes Ribeiro, Marcelo Rasga Moreira, Assis Maffort Ouverney, Luiz Felipe Pinto, Cosme Marcelo Furtado Passos da Silva

Abstract

This article analyses the main characteristics of federalism in Brazil and its institutional relations with health policy. It discusses federalism from a classical perspective highlighting the essentially centralized nature of Brazil's system and the prevalence of decentralizing health policies underpinned by the principles enshrined by the 1988 Constitution.We used primary data obtained from an electronic questionnaire responded by secretaries of health sitting on the governing bodies of the country's health region and secondary data Ministry of Health databases covering the current health regions. The findings show that significant progress has been made in the implementation of regional governing bodies, yet without any significant impact on the reduction of deep regional inequalities in primary and hospital care. It concludes by suggesting that the persistence of inequalities is down to weak central coordination capacity and an inappropriate trade-off between a centralized federal system and competition between entities, thus undermining cooperative regionalization of the public health system as envisaged by the 1988 Constitution.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 24%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 7%
Engineering 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 22 37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 19 April 2021.
All research outputs
#2,087,613
of 21,431,229 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#56
of 881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,950
of 240,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,431,229 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 881 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 240,356 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 84% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.