↓ Skip to main content

How does availability of county-level healthcare services shape terminal decline in well-being?

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Ageing, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
How does availability of county-level healthcare services shape terminal decline in well-being?
Published in
European Journal of Ageing, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10433-017-0425-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nina Vogel, Nilam Ram, Jan Goebel, Gert G. Wagner, Denis Gerstorf

Abstract

Both lifespan psychology and life course sociology highlight that contextual factors influence individual functioning and development. In the current study, we operationalize context as county-level care services in inpatient and outpatient facilities (e.g., number of care facilities, privacy in facilities) and investigate how the care context shapes well-being in the last years of life. To do so, we combine 29 waves of individual-level longitudinal data on life satisfaction from now deceased participants in the nationwide German Socio-Economic Panel Study (N = 4557; age at death: M = 73.35, SD = 14.20; 47% women) with county-level data from the Federal Statistical Office. Results from three-level growth models revealed that having more inpatient care facilities, more employees per resident, and more staff in administration are each uniquely associated with higher late-life well-being, independent of key individual (age at death, gender, education, disability) and county (affluence, demographic composition) characteristics. Number of employees in physical care, residential comfort, and flexibility and care indicators in outpatient institutions were not found to be associated with levels or change in well-being. We take our results to provide empirical evidence that some contextual factors shape well-being in the last years of life and discuss possible routes how local care services might alleviate terminal decline.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 14 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 13 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,470,944
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Ageing
#257
of 350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,133
of 315,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Ageing
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 350 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,212 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.