↓ Skip to main content

Health of midlife and older adults in China: the role of regional economic development, inequality, and institutional setting

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Public Health, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Health of midlife and older adults in China: the role of regional economic development, inequality, and institutional setting
Published in
International Journal of Public Health, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00038-017-0970-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xuejie Ding, Francesco C. Billari, Stuart Gietel-Basten

Abstract

To document the association between economic development, income inequality, and health-related public infrastructure, and health outcomes among Chinese adults in midlife and older age. We use a series of multi-level regression models with individual-level baseline data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Survey (CHARLS). Provincial-level data are obtained both from official statistics and from CHARLS itself. Multi-level models are estimated with different subjective and objective health outcomes. Economic growth is associated with better self-rated health, but also with obesity. Better health infrastructure tends to be negatively associated with health outcomes, indicating the likely presence of reverse causality. No supportive evidence is found for the hypothesis that income inequality leads to worse health outcomes. Our study shows that on top of individual characteristics, provincial variations in economic development, income inequality, and health infrastructure are associated with a range of health outcomes for Chinese midlife and older adults. Economic development in China might also bring adverse health outcomes for this age group; as such specific policy responses need to be developed.

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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 16%
Social Sciences 7 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,241,329
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#493
of 1,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,570
of 322,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#21
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 1,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 322,847 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 78% 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 is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.