↓ Skip to main content

Socioeconomic status, health inequalities and non-communicable diseases: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
17 news outlets
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
246 Mendeley
Title
Socioeconomic status, health inequalities and non-communicable diseases: a systematic review
Published in
The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10389-017-0850-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Santiago Lago, David Cantarero, Berta Rivera, Marta Pascual, Carla Blázquez-Fernández, Bruno Casal, Francisco Reyes

Abstract

A comprehensive approach to health highlights its close relationship with the social and economic conditions, physical environment and individual lifestyles. However, this relationship is not exempt from methodological problems that may bias the establishment of direct effects between the variables studied. Thus, further research is necessary to investigate the role of socioeconomic variables, their composition and distribution according to health status, particularly on non-communicable diseases. To shed light on this field, here a systematic review is performed using PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. A 7-year retrospective horizon was considered until 21 July 2017. Twenty-six papers were obtained from the database search. Additionally, results from "hand searching" were also included, where a wider horizon was considered. Five of the 26 studies analyzed used aggregated data compared to 21 using individual data. Eleven considered income as a study variable, while 17 analyzed the effect of income inequality on health status (2 of the studies considered both the absolute level and distribution of income). The most used indicator of inequality in the literature was the Gini index. Although different types of analysis produce very different results concerning the role of health determinants, the general conclusion is that income distribution is related to health where it represents a measure of the differences in social class in the society. The effect of income inequality is to increase the gap between social classes or to widen differences in status.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 246 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 14%
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 9%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 42 17%
Unknown 81 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 15%
Social Sciences 33 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 15 6%
Psychology 13 5%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 87 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 133. 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 04 April 2022.
All research outputs
#311,961
of 25,394,081 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,526
of 335,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Public Health: From Theory to Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,081 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 335,990 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them