↓ Skip to main content

Medical device landscape for communicable and noncommunicable diseases in low-income countries

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Medical device landscape for communicable and noncommunicable diseases in low-income countries
Published in
Globalization and Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12992-018-0355-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amir Sabet Sarvestani, Kathleen H. Sienko

Abstract

This study characterized the landscape of commercially available medical devices specifically designed for use in low-income countries (LICs). A state-of-the-art review of peer-reviewed publications, patents, global health databases, and online resources was performed. The criteria established for a health technology's inclusion in the study were: it met the definition of a medical device; it was designed and developed to address one of the top ten causes of death in LICs, Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4, or MDG 5; and there was evidence of its commercialization. Analysis identified 134 commercialized devices exclusively designed for use in LICs. More than 85% of devices were designed to address infectious diseases or child or maternal health (MDG 4 or 5, respectively). None of the identified devices addressed prevention of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). Only 8% of devices were designed for use in primary health facilities by non-physician health providers. There is a significant mismatch between the projected global burden of disease due to NCDs and the relevant number of commercialized medical devices designed specifically for use in LICs. A limited number of commercialized devices were designed for use by non-physician health providers. These findings suggest the need for medical devices targeting NCDs in LICs and design processes that consider the broader context of design and engage stakeholders throughout all phases of design.

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 4 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 30 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 31 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,572,368
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#821
of 1,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,910
of 328,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#28
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 328,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.