| Title |
Revisiting the Hispanic Health Paradox: The Relative Contributions of Nativity, Country of Origin, and Race/Ethnicity to Childhood Asthma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10903-013-9974-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marlene Camacho-Rivera, Ichiro Kawachi, Gary G. Bennett, S. V. Subramanian |
| Abstract |
This study examined the relationship between race and Hispanic ethnicity, maternal and child nativity, country of origin and asthma among 2,558 non-Hispanic white and Hispanic children across 65 Los Angeles neighborhoods. A series of two-level multilevel models were estimated to examine the independent effects of race, ethnicity, and country of origin on childhood asthma. Lifetime asthma prevalence was reported among 9 % of children, with no significant differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites overall. However, in fully adjusted models, Hispanic children of non-Mexican origin reported higher odds of asthma compared to non-Hispanic white children. A protective nativity effect was also observed among children of foreign born mothers compared to US born mothers. Our study provides evidence in support of the heterogeneity of childhood asthma by Hispanic ethnicity and maternal nativity. These findings suggest moving beyond solely considering racial/ethnic classifications which could mask subgroups at increased risk of childhood asthma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 22 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 13 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 220. 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 15 April 2022.
All research outputs
#158,880
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#5
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,469
of 312,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 312,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.