↓ 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

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 26%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Master 8 12%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 3 5%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Environmental Science 6 9%
Psychology 5 8%
Engineering 4 6%
Other 21 32%
Unknown 17 26%
Attention Score in Context

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
#13,330,650
of 22,997,544 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#354
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,670
of 318,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,997,544 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 318,007 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 50% 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 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.