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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Metabolic syndrome related health inequalities in Korean elderly: Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHAES)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal for Equity in Health, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12939-014-0097-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hak-Seon Kim |
| Abstract |
While the prevalence of metabolic syndrome is increasing, little is presently known about this syndrome in Korean elderly. This study aimed to group metabolic risk factors and to examine the associations between groups of health living conditions and metabolic syndrome using data from the Korean National Health Examination and Nutritional Assessment (KNHANES). A total of 1,435 subjects aged over 65 years old with both biochemical and dietary data information were obtained from the 4th and 5th KNHANES (2007¿2012). Using stratified and multistage probability sample data, five components of metabolic syndrome were adopted to identify health inequalities. Our findings show that groups of health living conditions such as dietary pattern, body image, muscle mass, and fat mass were differentially associated with metabolic syndrome risk factors. Future studies are necessary to examine the underlying mechanisms of individual health living conditions to better understand the role of metabolic risk factors in metabolic syndrome in elderly. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 22% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 November 2014.
All research outputs
#18,384,336
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,718
of 1,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,206
of 362,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#39
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,892 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 362,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.