↓ Skip to main content

Baseline participation in a health examination survey of the population 65 years and older: who is missed and why?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Baseline participation in a health examination survey of the population 65 years and older: who is missed and why?
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0185-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beate Gaertner, Ina Seitz, Judith Fuchs, Markus A. Busch, Martin Holzhausen, Peter Martus, Christa Scheidt-Nave

Abstract

Public health monitoring depends on valid health and disability estimates in the population 65+ years. This is hampered by high non-participation rates in this age group. There is limited insight into size and direction of potential baseline selection bias. We analyzed baseline non-participation in a register-based random sample of 1481 inner-city residents 65+ years, invited to a health examination survey according to demographics available for the entire sample, self-report information as available and reasons for non-participation. One year after recruitment, non-responders were revisited to assess their reasons. Five groups defined by participation status were differentiated: participants (N = 299), persons who had died or moved (N = 173), those who declined participation, but answered a short questionnaire (N = 384), those who declined participation and the short questionnaire (N = 324), and non-responders (N = 301). The results confirm substantial baseline selection bias with significant underrepresentation of persons 85+ years, persons in residential care or from disadvantaged neighborhoods, with lower education, foreign citizenship, or lower health-related quality of life. Finally, reasons for non-participation could be identified for 78 % of all non-participants, including 183 non-responders. A diversity in health problems and barriers to participation exists among non-participants. Innovative study designs are needed for public health monitoring in aging populations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Japan 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 43 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 21%
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 28%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 15 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,866,116
of 14,040,873 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#795
of 1,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,703
of 338,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,040,873 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,506 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 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 338,272 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them