↓ Skip to main content

Socioeconomic inequality of diabetes patients’ health care utilization in Denmark

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Socioeconomic inequality of diabetes patients’ health care utilization in Denmark
Published in
Health Economics Review, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13561-017-0155-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camilla Sortsø, Jørgen Lauridsen, Martha Emneus, Anders Green, Peter Bjødstrup Jensen

Abstract

Understanding socioeconomic inequalities in health care is critical for achieving health equity. The aim of this paper is threefold: 1) to quantify inequality in diabetes health care service utilization; 2) to understand determinants of these inequalities in relation to socio-demographic and clinical morbidity factors; and 3) to compare the empirical outcome of using income level and educational level as proxies for Socio Economic Status (SES).Data on the entire Danish population of diabetes patients in 2011 (N = 318,729) were applied. Patients' unique personal identification number enabled individual patient data from several national registers to be linked. A concentration index approach with decomposition into contributing factors was applied. Differences in diabetes patients' health care utilization patterns suggest that use of services differ among patients of lower and higher SES, despite the Danish universal health care system. Especially, out-patient services, rehabilitation and specialists in primary care show different utilization patterns according to SES. Comparison of the empirical outcome from using educational level and income level as proxy for patients' SES indicate important differences in inequality estimates. While income, alike other measures of labor market attachment, to a certain extent is explained by morbidity and thus endogenous, education is more decisive for patients' ability to take advantage of the more specialized services provided in a universal health care system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 19%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 40 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 14%
Social Sciences 12 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 42 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,841,511
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#109
of 514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,633
of 328,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 328,082 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them