↓ Skip to main content

Accidents and undetermined deaths: re-evaluation of nationwide samples from the Scandinavian countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 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
Accidents and undetermined deaths: re-evaluation of nationwide samples from the Scandinavian countries
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3135-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ingvild Maria Tøllefsen, Ingemar Thiblin, Karin Helweg-Larsen, Erlend Hem, Marianne Kastrup, Ullakarin Nyberg, Sidsel Rogde, Per-Henrik Zahl, Gunvor Østevold, Øivind Ekeberg

Abstract

National mortality statistics should be comparable between countries that use the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases. Distinguishing between manners of death, especially suicides and accidents, is a challenge. Knowledge about accidents is important in prevention of both accidents and suicides. The aim of the present study was to assess the reliability of classifying deaths as accidents and undetermined manner of deaths in the three Scandinavian countries and to compare cross-national differences. The cause of death registers in Norway, Sweden and Denmark provided data from 2008 for samples of 600 deaths from each country, of which 200 were registered as suicides, 200 as accidents or undetermined manner of deaths and 200 as natural deaths. The information given to the eight experts was identical to the information used by the Cause of Death Register. This included death certificates, and if available external post-mortem examinations, forensic autopsy reports and police reports. In total, 69 % (Sweden and Norway) and 78 % (Denmark) of deaths registered in the official mortality statistics as accidents were confirmed by the experts. In the majority of the cases where disagreement was seen, the experts reclassified accidents to undetermined manner of death, in 26, 25 and 19 % of cases, respectively. Few cases were reclassified as suicides or natural deaths. Among the extracted accidents, the experts agreed least with the official mortality statistics concerning drowning and poisoning accidents. They also reported most uncertainty in these categories of accidents. In a second re-evaluation, where more information was made available, the Norwegian psychiatrist and forensic pathologist increased their agreement with the official mortality statistics from 76 to 87 %, and from 85 to 88 %, respectively, regarding the Norwegian and Swedish datasets. Among the extracted undetermined deaths in the Swedish dataset, the two experts reclassified 22 and 51 %, respectively, to accidents. There was moderate agreement in reclassification of accidents between the official mortality statistics and the experts. In the majority of cases where there was disagreement, accidents were reclassified as undetermined manner of death, and only a small proportion as suicides.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 %
Portugal 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 12 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 18%
Psychology 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 13 46%

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 17 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,294,121
of 13,818,870 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,606
of 9,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,887
of 265,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,818,870 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 265,526 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 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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