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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Relating Older Workers’ Injuries to the Mismatch Between Physical Ability and Job Demands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1097/jom.0000000000000941 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura A. Fraade-Blanar, Jeanne M. Sears, Kwun Chuen G. Chan, Hilaire J. Thompson, Paul K. Crane, Beth E. Ebel |
| Abstract |
We examined the association between job demand and occupational injury among older workers. Participants were workers aged 50+ enrolled in the Health and Retirement Study, 2010 to 2014. Participants reported physical ability within three domains: physical effort, stooping/kneeling/crouching, and lifting. To measure subjective job demand, participants rated their job's demands within domains. We generated objective job demand measures through the Occupational Information Network (ONET). Using Poisson regression, we modeled the association between physical ability, job demand, and self-reported occupational injury. A second model explored interaction between job demand and physical ability. The injury rate was 22/1000 worker-years. Higher job demand was associated with increased injury risk. Within high job demands, lower physical ability was associated with increased injury risk. Older workers whose physical abilities do not meet job demands face increased injury risk. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 37% |
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 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#3,765,361
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
#817
of 4,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,262
of 420,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
#14
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 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 4,779 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 420,407 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.