↓ Skip to main content

Gaps in Indigenous disadvantage not closing: a census cohort study of social determinants of health in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand from 1981–2006

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 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
Gaps in Indigenous disadvantage not closing: a census cohort study of social determinants of health in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand from 1981–2006
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francis Mitrou, Martin Cooke, David Lawrence, David Povah, Elena Mobilia, Eric Guimond, Stephen R Zubrick

Abstract

Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all developed nations that are home to Indigenous populations which have historically faced poorer outcomes than their non-Indigenous counterparts on a range of health, social, and economic measures. The past several decades have seen major efforts made to close gaps in health and social determinants of health for Indigenous persons. We ask whether relative progress toward these goals has been achieved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 3 1%
Canada 2 <1%
Unknown 228 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 64 27%
Student > Master 44 19%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Postgraduate 16 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Other 46 20%
Unknown 24 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 23%
Social Sciences 41 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 17%
Psychology 14 6%
Arts and Humanities 9 4%
Other 49 21%
Unknown 27 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,015,763
of 21,174,193 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,329
of 13,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,603
of 201,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,174,193 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,720 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 201,545 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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