↓ Skip to main content

Determinantes de la equidad en el financiamiento de los medicamentos en Argentina: un estudio empírico

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Determinantes de la equidad en el financiamiento de los medicamentos en Argentina: un estudio empírico
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, February 2016
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00012215
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana Dondo, Mauricio Monsalvo, Lucas A Garibaldi

Abstract

Medicines are an important part of household health spending. A progressive system for financing drugs is thus essential for an equitable health system. Some authors have proposed that the determinants of equity in drug financing are socioeconomic, demographic, and associated with public interventions, but little progress has been made in the empirical evaluation and quantification of their relative importance. The current study estimated quantile regressions at the provincial level in Argentina and found that old age (> 65 years), unemployment, the existence of a public pharmaceutical laboratory, treatment transfers, and a health system orientated to primary care were important predictors of progressive payment schemes. Low income, weak institutions, and insufficient infrastructure and services were associated with the most regressive social responses to health needs, thereby aggravating living conditions and limiting development opportunities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 29%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Researcher 1 7%
Unknown 8 57%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 8 57%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 February 2017.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,322
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,522
of 311,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 311,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.