↓ Skip to main content

From causes to solutions - insights from lay knowledge about health inequalities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
From causes to solutions - insights from lay knowledge about health inequalities
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-67
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Putland, Fran E Baum, Anna M Ziersch

Abstract

This paper reports on a qualitative study of lay knowledge about health inequalities and solutions to address them. Social determinants of health are responsible for a large proportion of health inequalities (unequal levels of health status) and inequities (unfair access to health services and resources) within and between countries. Despite an expanding evidence base supporting action on social determinants, understanding of the impact of these determinants is not widespread and political will appears to be lacking. A small but growing body of research has explored how ordinary people theorise health inequalities and the implications for taking action. The findings are variable, however, in terms of an emphasis on structure versus individual agency and the relationship between being 'at risk' and acceptance of social/structural explanations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 91 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 18%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 12%
Researcher 11 11%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 24 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 13%
Psychology 6 6%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 25 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#5,043,021
of 20,629,552 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,024
of 13,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,707
of 273,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,629,552 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,455 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 273,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.