↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Health research barriers in the faculties of two medical institutions in India

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Health research barriers in the faculties of two medical institutions in India
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, August 2012
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s27841
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kannan Anjur Tupil, Kannan Anjur Tupil, Venkatesh, Alikaram Alamdari, Roozbehi

Abstract

Health policy formation refers to the design of a conceptual framework to find possibilities, facilitate feasibilities, and identify strong and weak points, as well as insufficiencies, by research. Doing research should clarify qualities and standards for policy and decision-making to enable the success of development of health care in a country. Evaluation of the impact of health interventions is particularly poorly represented in public health research. This study attempted to identify barriers and facilitators of health research among faculty members in two major institutions in India, ie, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and the University College of Medical Sciences (UCMS) and Guru Tegh Bahadur (GTB) Hospital in Delhi.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Librarian 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 13 29%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Social Sciences 9 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 September 2012.
All research outputs
#14,148,857
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#423
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,070
of 164,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#8
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 164,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.