↓ Skip to main content

Agenda Setting and Evidence in Maternal Health: Connecting Research and Policy in Timor-Leste

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2015
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Agenda Setting and Evidence in Maternal Health: Connecting Research and Policy in Timor-Leste
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00212
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kayli Wild, Paul Kelly, Lesley Barclay, Nelson Martins

Abstract

The evidence-based policy (EBP) movement has received significant attention in the scientific literature; however, there is still very little empirical research to provide insight into how policy decisions are made and how evidence is used. The lack of research on this topic in low- and middle-income countries is of particular note. We examine the maternity waiting home policy in Timor-Leste to understand the role of context, policy characteristics, individual actors, and how evidence is used to influence the policy agenda. The research tracked the maternity waiting home policy from 2005 to 2009 and is based on in-depth interviews with 31 senior policy-makers, department managers, non-government organization representatives, and United Nations advisors. It is also informed by direct observation, attendance at meetings and workshops, and analysis of policy documents. The findings from this ethnographic case study demonstrate that although the post-conflict context opened up space for new policy ideas senior Ministry of Health officials rather than donors had the most power in setting the policy agenda. Maternity waiting homes were appealing because they were a visible, non-controversial, and logical solution to the problem of accessing maternal health services. Evidence was used in a variety of ways, from supporting pre-determined agendas to informing new policy directions. In the pursuit of EBP, we conclude that the power of research to inform policy lies in its timeliness and relevance, and is facilitated by the connection between researchers and policy-makers.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ethiopia 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Researcher 6 14%
Lecturer 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 14%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Engineering 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 39%
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 10 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,488,557
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,747
of 10,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,637
of 268,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#31
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 268,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.