↓ Skip to main content

The importance of illness duration, age at diagnosis and the year of diagnosis for labour participation chances of people with chronic illness: results of a nationwide panel-study in the Netherlands

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
The importance of illness duration, age at diagnosis and the year of diagnosis for labour participation chances of people with chronic illness: results of a nationwide panel-study in the Netherlands
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-803
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mieke Rijken, Peter Spreeuwenberg, Joop Schippers, Peter P Groenewegen

Abstract

Compared to participation rates among general populations, participation of people with chronic illness in the labour market lags behind. This is undesirable, both from the perspective of individuals' well-being as from a macro-economic perspective for western countries where concerns exist about labour supply and sustainability of social security in the near future. To help develop successful policy measures to prevent early drop-out and support reintegration, we aimed to gain insight into the role of three age related characteristics that may relate to labour participation chances of people with chronic illness: the duration of their illness, how old they were when the chronic disease was diagnosed and the historical year in which the diagnosis was established.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 75 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 17%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 22 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 13%
Psychology 7 9%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 26 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#14,175,799
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,282
of 14,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,133
of 196,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#207
of 278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 196,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.