↓ Skip to main content

Health equity in the New Zealand health care system: a national survey

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
280 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 equity in the New Zealand health care system: a national survey
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-10-45
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolette F Sheridan, Timothy W Kenealy, Martin J Connolly, Faith Mahony, P Alan Barber, Mary Anne Boyd, Peter Carswell, Janet Clinton, Gerard Devlin, Robert Doughty, Lorna Dyall, Ngaire Kerse, John Kolbe, Ross Lawrenson, Allan Moffitt

Abstract

In all countries people experience different social circumstances that result in avoidable differences in health. In New Zealand, Māori, Pacific peoples, and those with lower socioeconomic status experience higher levels of chronic illness, which is the leading cause of mortality, morbidity and inequitable health outcomes. Whilst the health system can enable a fairer distribution of good health, limited national data is available to measure health equity. Therefore, we sought to find out whether health services in New Zealand were equitable by measuring the level of development of components of chronic care management systems across district health boards. Variation in provision by geography, condition or ethnicity can be interpreted as inequitable.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 280 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 4 1%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 270 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 53 19%
Student > Postgraduate 46 16%
Student > Master 32 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 10%
Researcher 18 6%
Other 46 16%
Unknown 57 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 20%
Social Sciences 34 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Psychology 6 2%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 64 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#6,925,851
of 21,343,339 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,090
of 1,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,221
of 143,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,343,339 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 143,688 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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