↓ Skip to main content

The physical health of British adults with intellectual disability: cross sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Readers on

mendeley
221 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
The physical health of British adults with intellectual disability: cross sectional study
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12939-016-0296-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric Emerson, Chris Hatton, Susannah Baines, Janet Robertson

Abstract

Adults with intellectual disability have poorer health than their non-disabled peers. However, little is known about the health of the 'hidden majority' of adults with primarily mild intellectual disability who do not use intellectual disability services. The aims of the present study were: to estimate the physical health status of a population-based sample of British adults with and without mild intellectual disability while controlling for any potentially confounding effects resulting from between-group differences in gender, age, socio-economic disadvantage and neighborhood social capital. Secondary analysis of data from Understanding Society, a new longitudinal study focusing on the life experiences of UK citizens. We identified 299 participants aged 16-49 (1.2 % of the unweighted age-restricted sample) as having intellectual disability, and 22,927 as not having intellectual disability. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate between group differences adjusting for potential confounding personal characteristics (e.g., gender). Unadjusted comparisons indicated that British adults with intellectual disability have markedly poorer health than their non-disabled peers on the majority of indicators investigated including self-rated health, multiple morbidity, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, obesity, measured grip strength, measured lung function and polypharmacy. Adjusting for between-group differences in age and gender had a marginal impact on these estimates. Further adjusting for between-group differences in socio-economic disadvantage and neighborhood quality had a more marked impact on estimates with the number of statistically significant differences reducing from 13 to 8 and statistically significant attenuation of odds on three indicators (self-rated health, SF-12 physical component and multiple morbidity). The 'hidden majority' of adults with primarily mild intellectual disability who do not use intellectual disability services have significantly poorer health than their non-disabled peers. This may, in part, reflect their increased risk of exposure to well established 'social determinants' of poorer health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 221 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 11%
Researcher 20 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 8%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 46 21%
Unknown 63 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Social Sciences 25 11%
Psychology 22 10%
Sports and Recreations 7 3%
Other 30 14%
Unknown 75 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#3,916,539
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#686
of 2,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,472
of 403,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#15
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 403,878 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 70% of its contemporaries.