↓ Skip to main content

Mutual learning and reverse innovation–where next?

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
46 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Mutual learning and reverse innovation–where next?
Published in
Globalization and Health, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1744-8603-10-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nigel Crisp

Abstract

There is a clear and evident need for mutual learning in global health systems. It is increasingly recognized that innovation needs to be sourced globally and that we need to think in terms of co-development as ideas are developed and spread from richer to poorer countries and vice versa. The Globalization and Health journal's ongoing thematic series, "Reverse innovation in global health systems: learning from low-income countries" illustrates how mutual learning and ideas about so-called "reverse innovation" or "frugal innovation" are being developed and utilized by researchers and practitioners around the world. The knowledge emerging from the series is already catalyzing change and challenging the status quo in global health. The path to truly "global innovation flow", although not fully established, is now well under way. Mobilization of knowledge and resources through continuous communication and awareness raising can help sustain this movement. Global health learning laboratories, where partners can support each other in generating and sharing lessons, have the potential to construct solutions for the world. At the heart of this dialogue is a focus on creating practical local solutions and, simultaneously, drawing out the lessons for the whole world.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 tweeters 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 111 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 14 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 23%
Business, Management and Accounting 22 19%
Engineering 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 16 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 16 May 2020.
All research outputs
#671,609
of 17,733,079 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#83
of 907 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,400
of 198,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,733,079 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 907 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 198,527 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
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