↓ Skip to main content

Health behaviours of Australian men and the likelihood of attending a dedicated men’s health service

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Health behaviours of Australian men and the likelihood of attending a dedicated men’s health service
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5992-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew D. Vincent, Phoebe G. Drioli-Phillips, Jana Le, Lynette Cusack, Timothy J. Schultz, Margaret A. McGee, Deborah A. Turnbull, Gary A. Wittert

Abstract

Redesigning primary health services may enhance timely and effective uptake by men. The primary aim of this study was to assess the likelihood of Australian men attending a dedicated men's health service (DMHS). The further aims were to better understand the reasons for their preferences and determine how health behaviours influence likelihood. A survey on health service use and preferences, health help-seeking behaviours, and the likelihood of attending a DMHS was administered by telephone to 1506 randomly selected men (median age 56 years, range 19-95). Likelihood of attending a DMHS was rated using a single item Likert scale where 0 was not at all likely and 10 highly likely. Respondents were classified by age (< or > = 65 years) and health status. Principal component analyses were used to define health behaviours, specifically help-seeking and delay/avoidance regarding visiting a doctor. Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses were used to examine predictors of likelihood of attending a DMHS. The mean likelihood of attending a DMHS was 5.8 (SD 3.3, median 6, moderate likelihood) and 21%, 26% and 23% of men rated likelihood as moderate, high and very high respectively. Being happy with their existing doctor was the most common reason (52%) for being less likely to attend a DMHS. In unadjusted analyses, younger men reported being more likely to attend a DMHS (p < 0.001) with older-sick men reporting being least likely (p < 0.001). Younger men were more likely than older men to score higher on delay/avoidance and were more likely to self-monitor. In the full model, men with current health concerns (p ≤ 0.01), who scored higher on delay/avoidance (p ≤ 0.0006), who were more likely to be information-seekers (p < 0.0001) and/or were motivated to change their health (p ≤ 0.0001) reported a higher likelihood of attending a DMHS irrespective of age and health status. Seventy percent of men reported a moderate or higher likelihood of attending a DMHS. As young healthy men are more likely than older men to display health behaviours that are associated with a higher likelihood of attending a DHMS, such as delay/avoidance, marketing a DMHS to such men may be of value.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 9 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Arts and Humanities 2 7%
Computer Science 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 13 46%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,394,158
of 13,500,498 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,815
of 9,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,092
of 266,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,500,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 266,227 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 50% of its contemporaries.