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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Social trust, interpersonal trust and self-rated health in China: a multi-level study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal for Equity in Health, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12939-016-0469-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhixin Feng, Athina Vlachantoni, Xiaoting Liu, Kelvyn Jones |
| Abstract |
Trust is important for health at both the individual and societal level. Previous research using Western concepts of trust has shown that a high level of trust in society can positively affect individuals' health; however, it has been found that the concepts and culture of trust in China are different from those in Western countries and research on the relationship between trust and health in China is scarce. The analyses use data from the national scale China General Social Survey (CGSS) on adults aged above 18 in 2005 and 2010. Two concepts of trust ("out-group" and "in-group" trust) are used to examine the relationship between trust and self-rated health in China. Multilevel logistical models are applied, examining the trust at the individual and societal level on individuals' self-rated health. In terms of interpersonal trust, both "out-group" and "in-group" trust are positively associated with good health in 2005 and 2010. At the societal level, the relationships between the two concepts of trust and health are different. In 2005, higher "out-group" social trust (derived from trust in strangers) is positively associated with better health; however, higher "in-group" social trust (derived from trust in most people) is negatively associated with good health in 2010. The cross-level interactions show that lower educated individuals (no education or only primary level), rural residents and those on lower incomes are the most affected groups in societies with higher "out-group" social trust; whereas people with lower levels of educational attainment, a lower income, and those who think that most people can be trusted are the most affected groups in societies with higher "in-group" social trust. High levels of interpersonal trust are of benefit to health. Higher "out-group" social trust is positively associated with better health; while higher "in-group" social trust is negatively associated with good health. Individuals with different levels of educational attainment are affected by trust differently. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 60 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 21% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 14 | 23% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 10% |
| Psychology | 6 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 14 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,306,828
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#402
of 1,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,389
of 313,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#12
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. 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 313,483 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.