↓ Skip to main content

Potential health gains and health losses in eleven EU countries attainable through feasible prevalences of the life-style related risk factors alcohol, BMI, and smoking: a quantitative health impact…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Potential health gains and health losses in eleven EU countries attainable through feasible prevalences of the life-style related risk factors alcohol, BMI, and smoking: a quantitative health impact assessment
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3299-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan K. Lhachimi, Wilma J. Nusselder, Henriette A. Smit, Paolo Baili, Kathleen Bennett, Esteve Fernández, Margarete C. Kulik, Tim Lobstein, Joceline Pomerleau, Hendriek C. Boshuizen, Johan P. Mackenbach

Abstract

Influencing the life-style risk-factors alcohol, body mass index (BMI), and smoking is an European Union (EU) wide objective of public health policy. The population-level health effects of these risk-factors depend on population specific characteristics and are difficult to quantify without dynamic population health models. For eleven countries-approx. 80 % of the EU-27 population-we used evidence from the publicly available DYNAMO-HIA data-set. For each country the age- and sex-specific risk-factor prevalence and the incidence, prevalence, and excess mortality of nine chronic diseases are utilized; including the corresponding relative risks linking risk-factor exposure causally to disease incidence and all-cause mortality. Applying the DYNAMO-HIA tool, we dynamically project the country-wise potential health gains and losses using feasible, i.e. observed elsewhere, risk-factor prevalence rates as benchmarks. The effects of the "worst practice", "best practice", and the currently observed risk-factor prevalence on population health are quantified and expected changes in life expectancy, morbidity-free life years, disease cases, and cumulative mortality are reported. Applying the best practice smoking prevalence yields the largest gains in life expectancy with 0.4 years for males and 0.3 year for females (approx. 332,950 and 274,200 deaths postponed, respectively) while the worst practice smoking prevalence also leads to the largest losses with 0.7 years for males and 0.9 year for females (approx. 609,400 and 710,550 lives lost, respectively). Comparing morbidity-free life years, the best practice smoking prevalence shows the highest gains for males with 0.4 years (342,800 less disease cases), whereas for females the best practice BMI prevalence yields the largest gains with 0.7 years (1,075,200 less disease cases). Smoking is still the risk-factor with the largest potential health gains. BMI, however, has comparatively large effects on morbidity. Future research should aim to improve knowledge of how policies can influence and shape individual and aggregated life-style-related risk-factor behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 19%
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Environmental Science 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 19 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 20 August 2016.
All research outputs
#1,603,940
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,754
of 14,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,323
of 366,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#58
of 374 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 366,897 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 374 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.