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 |
Estimating multiple morbidity disease burden among older persons: a convergent construct validity study to discriminate among six chronic illness measures, CCHS 2008/09
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-015-0001-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew V Wister, Mélanie Levasseur, Lauren E Griffith, Ian Fyffe |
| Abstract |
Since approximately two in three older adults (65+) report having two or more chronic diseases, causes and consequences of multimorbidity among older persons has important personal and societal issues. Indeed, having more than one chronic condition might involve synergetic effects, which can increase impact on disabilities and quality of life of older adults. Moreover, persons with multimorbidity require more health care treatments, implying burden for the person, her/his family and the health care system. Using the 2008/09 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), this paper assesses the convergent construct validity of six measures of multimorbidity for persons aged 65 and over. These measures include: 1) Multimorbidity Dichotomized (0, 1+ conditions); 2) Multimorbidity Dichotomized (0/1, 2+); 3) Multimorbidity Additive Scale; 4) Multimorbidity Weighted by the Health Utility (HUI3) Scale; 5) Multimorbidity Weighted by the OARS Activity of Daily Living (ADL) Scale; and 6) Multimorbidity Weighted by HUI3 (using beta coefficients). Convergent construct validity was assessed using correlations and OLS regression coefficients for each of the multimorbidity measures with the following social-psychological and health outcome variables: life satisfaction, perceived health, number of health professional visits, and medication use. Overall, the two dichotomies (scales #1 & #2) showed the weakest construct validity with the health outcome variables. The additive chronic illness scale (#3) and the multimorbidity weighted by ADLs (#5), performed better than the other two weighted scales using (HUI #4 & #6). Measurement errors apparent in the dichotomous multimorbidity measures were amplified for older women, especially for life satisfaction and perceived health, but decreased when using the scales, suggesting stronger validity of scales #3 through #6. To properly represent multimorbidity, using dichotomous measures should be used with caution. When only prevalence data are available for chronic conditions, such as in the CCHSs or CLSA, an additive multimorbidity scale can better measure total illness burden than simple dichotomous or other discrete measures. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 45% |
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 09 April 2015.
All research outputs
#18,405,972
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,627
of 3,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,210
of 255,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 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 3,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 255,022 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.