↓ Skip to main content

Inequalities in mortality among refugees and immigrants compared to native Danes – a historical prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
Inequalities in mortality among refugees and immigrants compared to native Danes – a historical prospective cohort study
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-757
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Norredam, Maja Olsbjerg, Jorgen H Petersen, Knud Juel, Allan Krasnik

Abstract

Comparisons of mortality patterns between different migrant groups, and between migrants and natives, are relevant to understanding, and ultimately reducing, inequalities in health. To date, European studies on migrants' mortality patterns are scarce and are based solely on country of birth, rather than migrant status. However, mortality patterns may be affected by implications in relation to migrant status, such as health hazards related to life circumstances before and during migration, and factors related to ethnic origin. Consequently, we investigated differences in both all-cause and cause-specific mortality from cancer and cardiovascular disease among refugees and immigrants, compared with the mortality among native Danes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 2 2%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Master 12 13%
Other 7 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 33%
Social Sciences 16 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 25 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,793,458
of 23,924,386 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,139
of 15,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,076
of 169,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#126
of 330 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,924,386 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,559 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 169,910 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 330 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 60% of its contemporaries.