↓ Skip to main content

Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 13,887)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
54 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
200 tweeters
facebook
13 Facebook pages
googleplus
5 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
284 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
493 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-773
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline E Jenkinson, Andy P Dickens, Kerry Jones, Jo Thompson-Coon, Rod S Taylor, Morwenna Rogers, Clare L Bambra, Iain Lang, Suzanne H Richards

Abstract

Volunteering has been advocated by the United Nations, and American and European governments as a way to engage people in their local communities and improve social capital, with the potential for public health benefits such as improving wellbeing and decreasing health inequalities. Furthermore, the US Corporation for National and Community Service Strategic Plan for 2011-2015 focused on increasing the impact of national service on community needs, supporting volunteers' wellbeing, and prioritising recruitment and engagement of underrepresented populations. The aims of this review were to examine the effect of formal volunteering on volunteers' physical and mental health and survival, and to explore the influence of volunteering type and intensity on health outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 200 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 493 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 1%
Australia 3 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 477 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 86 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 16%
Researcher 67 14%
Student > Bachelor 63 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 7%
Other 82 17%
Unknown 81 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 99 20%
Social Sciences 90 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 76 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 15 3%
Other 77 16%
Unknown 101 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 641. 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 23 March 2022.
All research outputs
#24,485
of 21,392,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#29
of 13,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123
of 176,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,392,919 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 176,967 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.