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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A population based validation study of self-reported pensions and benefits: the Nord-Trøndelag health study (HUNT)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-6-27 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Solbjørg Makalani Myrtveit, Anja M S Ariansen, Ingvard Wilhelmsen, Steinar Krokstad, Arnstein Mykletun |
| Abstract |
Measures of disability pensions, sickness certification and long-term health related benefits are often self-reported in epidemiological studies. Few studies have examined these measures, and the validity is yet to be established.We aimed to estimate the validity of self-reported disability pension, rehabilitation benefit and retirement pension and to explore the benefit status and basic characteristics of those not responding to these items.A large health survey (HUNT2) containing self-reported questionnaire data on sickness benefits and pensions was linked to a national registry of pensions and benefits, used as "gold standard" for the analysis. We investigated two main sources of bias in self-reported data; misclassification - due to participants answering questions incorrectly, and systematic missing/selection bias - when participants do not respond to the questions.Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predicative value, agreement and Cohen's Kappa were calculated for each benefit. Co-variables were compared between non-responders and responders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 41% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 35% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 24% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 November 2023.
All research outputs
#8,060,551
of 24,911,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,275
of 4,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,653
of 292,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#16
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,911,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,471 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 292,178 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 68% of its contemporaries.