↓ Skip to main content

Association between cultural distance and migrant self-rated health

Overview of attention for article published in HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2017
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Association between cultural distance and migrant self-rated health
Published in
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10198-017-0881-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jens Detollenaere, Stijn Baert, Sara Willems, Detollenaere, Jens, Baert, Stijn, Willems, Sara

Abstract

We study whether migrant health in Europe is associated with the cultural distance between their host country and country of origin. To this end, we run multilevel regression models on data merging self-rated health and social background of ≥3800 migrants from the European Social Survey with an index of cultural distance based on country differences in values, norms and attitudes measured in the World Values Survey. We find that higher levels of cultural distance are associated with worse migrant health. This association is comparable in size with the negative association between health and female (compared with male) gender but less important than the association between health and education level. In addition, this association is less significant among second-generation than first-generation migrants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Social Sciences 6 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 8%
Psychology 4 8%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 17 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 08 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,374,859
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#107
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,428
of 322,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 322,957 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.