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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The choice of self-rated health measures matter when predicting mortality: evidence from 10 years follow-up of the Australian longitudinal study of ageing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, April 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2318-10-18 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kerry A Sargent-Cox, Kaarin J Anstey, Mary A Luszcz |
| Abstract |
Self-rated health (SRH) measures with different wording and reference points are often used as equivalent health indicators in public health surveys estimating health outcomes such as healthy life expectancies and mortality for older adults. Whilst the robust relationship between SRH and mortality is well established, it is not known how comparable different SRH items are in their relationship to mortality over time. We used a dynamic evaluation model to investigate the sensitivity of time-varying SRH measures with different reference points to predict mortality in older adults over time. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Psychology | 7 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 32% |
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 11 July 2010.
All research outputs
#4,677,977
of 22,709,015 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,206
of 3,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,929
of 94,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,709,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 94,997 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.