↓ Skip to main content

Measurement and decomposition of socioeconomic inequality in single and multimorbidity in older adults in China and Ghana: results from the WHO study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE)

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 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
Measurement and decomposition of socioeconomic inequality in single and multimorbidity in older adults in China and Ghana: results from the WHO study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE)
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0578-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rasha Kunna, Miguel San Sebastian, Jennifer Stewart Williams

Abstract

Globally people are living longer and enduring non-communicable diseases (NCDs) many of which co-occur as multimorbidity. Demographic and socioeconomic factors are determinants of inequalities and inequities in health. There is a need for country-specific evidence of NCD inequalities in developing countries where populations are ageing rapidly amid economic and social change. The study measures and decomposes socioeconomic inequality in single and multiple NCD morbidity in adults aged 50 and over in China and Ghana. The data source is the World Health Organization Study on Global AGEing and Adult Health (SAGE) Wave 1 (2007-2010). Nationally representative cross-sectional data collected from adults in China (n = 11,814) and Ghana (n = 4,050) are analysed. Country populations are ranked by a socioeconomic index based on ownership of household assets. The study uses a decomposed concentration index (CI) of single and multiple NCD morbidity (multimorbidity) covering arthritis, diabetes, angina, stroke, asthma, depression, chronic lung disease and hypertension. The CI quantifies the extent of overall inequality on each morbidity measure. The decomposition utilises a regression-based approach to examine individual contributions of demographic and socioeconomic factors, or determinants, to the overall inequality. In China, the prevalence of single and multiple NCD morbidity was 64.7% and 53.4%, compared with 65.9% and 55.5% respectively in Ghana. Inequalities were significant and more highly concentrated among the poor in China (single morbidity CI = -0.0365: 95% CI = -0.0689,-0.0040; multimorbidity CI = -0.0801: 95% CI = -0.1233,-0.0368;). In Ghana inequalities were significant and more highly concentrated among the rich (single morbidity CI = 0.1182; 95% CI = 0.0697, 0.1668; multimorbidity CI = 0.1453: 95% CI = 0.0794, 0.2083). In China, rural residence contributed most to inequality in single morbidity (36.4%) and the wealth quintiles contributed most to inequality in multimorbidity (39.0%). In Ghana, the wealth quintiles contributed 24.5% to inequality in single morbidity and body mass index contributed 16.2% to the inequality in multimorbidity. The country comparison reflects different stages of economic development and social change in China and Ghana. More studies of this type are needed to inform policy-makers about the patterning of socioeconomic inequalities in health, particularly in developing countries undergoing rapid epidemiological and demographic transitions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Unknown 220 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 16%
Researcher 26 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Student > Bachelor 13 6%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 71 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 19%
Social Sciences 22 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 14 6%
Psychology 11 5%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 82 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,459,782
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,544
of 1,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,845
of 309,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#35
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 309,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.