↓ Skip to main content

Understanding tobacco use and socioeconomic inequalities among men in Ghana, and Lesotho

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Public Health, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Understanding tobacco use and socioeconomic inequalities among men in Ghana, and Lesotho
Published in
Archives of Public Health, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13690-017-0197-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kwamena Sekyi Dickson, Bright Opoku Ahinkorah

Abstract

Tobacco use is one of the leading causes of preventable deaths and has become a significant public health issue. Previous studies have paid less attention to tobacco use and socio-economic equalities among men in developing countries. This study examines the relationship between tobacco use and socio-economic inequalities among men in Ghana and Lesotho. The study made use of data from the 2014 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) from Ghana, and Lesotho. Binary logistic regression was employed to examine the associations between socio-economic inequality characteristics of respondents and tobacco use. The results showed that the prevalence of tobacco use was high in Lesotho (47.9%) as compared to that of Ghana (6.3%). Tobacco use was generally high across all age groups in Lesotho and in contrast, it was relatively low across all ages in Ghana. A statistically significant association was found between all the socio-economic variables and tobacco use in both countries. The prevalence of tobacco use was smaller in age group 15-24 years compared to the age groups 25-34 years and 35-59 years in both Ghana and Lesotho, although the association is stronger in Ghana. The AOR's in Ghana are respectively 5.3 (95% CI: 3.29-8.59) and 9.7 (95% CI: 6.20-15.06), compared to respectively 1.7 (95% CI: 1.32-2.11) and 1.7 (95% CI: 1.36-2.12). Smoking prevalence was smaller in men with higher level of education compared to men with no education in both Ghana and Lesotho, although the association was weaker in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 0.1 (95% CI: (0.02-0.11), compared to 0.2 (95% Cl: (0.17-0.30). The prevalence of tobacco use was smaller among men in urban areas compared to rural areas in both Ghana and Lesotho, although the association is stronger in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 2.1 (95% CI: 1.67-2.73), compared to 1.6 (95% CI: (1.31-1.95). In both countries, prevalence of tobacco use was higher in men who are traditionalist/spiritualists or who had no religion compared to Christians, although the association was stronger in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 6.2 (95% CI: (4.42-4.09) compared to 1.7 (95% CI: (1.21-2.47). The prevalence of tobacco use was low among men with richest wealth status compared to men with poorest wealth status in both Ghana and Lesotho, although the association is weaker in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 0.1 (95% Cl: (0.06-0.17) compared to 0.4 (95% CI: (0.51-1.12). In relation to occupation, prevalence of tobacco use was smaller among professional workers compared to men in the Agricultural sector in both Ghana and Lesotho, although the association is stronger in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 9.3 (95% Cl: (4.54-18.99), compared to 3.5 (95% CI: (2.27-5.52). Formerly married men in both countries were more likely to use tobacco compared to currently not married men, although the prevalence was higher in Ghana. The AOR in Ghana is 1.6 (95% CI: (0.99-2.28)], compared to 1.4 (95% CI: (0.89-2.28) in Lesotho. Although similar socio-economic inequality factors provided an understanding of tobacco use among men in Ghana and Lesotho, there were variations in relation to how each factor influences tobacco use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Lecturer 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Engineering 2 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 19 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,113,052
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#224
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,183
of 326,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 326,157 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.