↓ Skip to main content

Mobility assessment of a rural population in the Netherlands using GPS measurements

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Mobility assessment of a rural population in the Netherlands using GPS measurements
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12942-017-0103-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gijs Klous, Lidwien A. M. Smit, Floor Borlée, Roel A. Coutinho, Mirjam E. E. Kretzschmar, Dick J. J. Heederik, Anke Huss

Abstract

The home address is a common spatial proxy for exposure assessment in epidemiological studies but mobility may introduce exposure misclassification. Mobility can be assessed using self-reports or objectively measured using GPS logging but self-reports may not assess the same information as measured mobility. We aimed to assess mobility patterns of a rural population in the Netherlands using GPS measurements and self-reports and to compare GPS measured to self-reported data, and to evaluate correlates of differences in mobility patterns. In total 870 participants filled in a questionnaire regarding their transport modes and carried a GPS-logger for 7 consecutive days. Transport modes were assigned to GPS-tracks based on speed patterns. Correlates of measured mobility data were evaluated using multiple linear regression. We calculated walking, biking and motorised transport durations based on GPS and self-reported data and compared outcomes. We used Cohen's kappa analyses to compare categorised self-reported and GPS measured data for time spent outdoors. Self-reported time spent walking and biking was strongly overestimated when compared to GPS measurements. Participants estimated their time spent in motorised transport accurately. Several variables were associated with differences in mobility patterns, we found for instance that obese people (BMI > 30 kg/m(2)) spent less time in non-motorised transport (GMR 0.69-0.74) and people with COPD tended to travel longer distances from home in motorised transport (GMR 1.42-1.51). If time spent walking outdoors and biking is relevant for the exposure to environmental factors, then relying on the home address as a proxy for exposure location may introduce misclassification. In addition, this misclassification is potentially differential, and specific groups of people will show stronger misclassification of exposure than others. Performing GPS measurements and identifying explanatory factors of mobility patterns may assist in regression calibration of self-reports in other studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 30%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 7 12%
Other 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Environmental Science 6 10%
Engineering 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Psychology 5 8%
Other 18 30%
Unknown 15 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 August 2017.
All research outputs
#6,133,851
of 11,638,207 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#209
of 450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,760
of 265,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,638,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 265,690 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 58% 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 is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.