| Title |
Costs and outcomes of improving population health through better social housing: a cohort study and economic analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-017-0989-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nathan Bray, Paul Burns, Alice Jones, Eira Winrow, Rhiannon Tudor Edwards |
| Abstract |
We sought to determine the impact of warmth-related housing improvements on the health, well-being, and quality of life of families living in social housing. An historical cohort study design was used. Households were recruited by Gentoo, a social housing contractor in North East England. Recruited households were asked to complete a quality of life, well-being, and health service use questionnaire before receiving housing improvements (new energy-efficient boiler and double-glazing) and again 12 months afterwards. Data were collected from 228 households. The average intervention cost was £3725. At 12-month post-intervention, a 16% reduction (-£94.79) in household 6-month health service use was found. Statistically significant positive improvements were observed in main tenant and household health status (p < 0.001; p = 0.009, respectively), main tenant satisfaction with financial situation (p = 0.020), number of rooms left unheated per household (p < 0.001), frequency of household outpatient appointments (p = 0.001), and accident/emergency department attendance (p < 0.012). Warmth-related housing improvements may be a cost-effective means of improving the health of social housing tenants and reducing health service expenditure, particularly in older populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 38% |
| Ireland | 2 | 7% |
| Argentina | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 21% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 8% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 10 February 2022.
All research outputs
#669,063
of 25,508,813 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#52
of 1,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,015
of 331,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,508,813 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 331,982 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 95% 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 99% of its contemporaries.