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 |
Motivations for (non)participation in population-based health studies among the elderly – comparison of participants and nonparticipants of a prospective study on influenza vaccination
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-017-0302-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manas K. Akmatov, Leonhard Jentsch, Peggy Riese, Marcus May, Malik W. Ahmed, Damaris Werner, Anja Rösel, Jana Prokein, Inga Bernemann, Norman Klopp, Blair Prochnow, Thomas Illig, Christoph Schindler, Carlos A. Guzman, Frank Pessler |
| Abstract |
Participation in epidemiological studies has strongly declined in recent years. We examined the reasons for (non)participation in population-based health studies among participants and nonparticipants of a prospective study on influenza vaccination among the elderly. Males and females between 65 and 80 years of age (N = 5582) were randomly selected from the residents' registration office in Hannover, Germany, and were invited to participate in a study featuring vaccination with a seasonal adjuvanted influenza vaccine (Fluad™, Novartis) including five follow-up visits (day 0, 1/3, 7, 21, 70 with respect to vaccination). A 24-item nonresponder questionnaire, including 10 items on reasons for participating in a hypothetical health study, was mailed to 1500 randomly selected nonparticipants. The same 10 items were included in the end-of-study questionnaire administered to the participants in the vaccination study (n = 200). Logistic regression analysis with backward elimination was used to identify the reasons most strongly associated with nonparticipation. Five hundred thirty-one (35%) nonparticipants and 200 participants (100%) returned the respective questionnaires. Nonparticipation was associated with a lower interest in obtaining personal health information (OR = 3.32) and a preference for less invasive (OR = 3.01) and less time-demanding (OR = 2.19) studies. Responses to other items, e.g. regarding altruistic motives, monetary compensation, general interest of the study, or study approval through ethics committee and data security authority, did not differ between participants and nonparticipants. Participation rates in health studies among elderly individuals could potentially be improved by reducing interventions and time demand, for instance by implementing methods of self-sampling and remote data collection. No. 1100359 (ClinicalTrials.gov, date of registration: 09.02.2015). |
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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Psychology | 5 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 21% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 February 2017.
All research outputs
#21,264,673
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,976
of 2,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#361,394
of 424,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#27
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 424,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.