↓ Skip to main content

Contemporary contestations over working time: time for health to weigh in

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Contemporary contestations over working time: time for health to weigh in
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane Dixon, Gemma Carey, Lyndall Strazdins, Cathy Banwell, Dan Woodman, John Burgess, Michael Bittman, Danielle Venn, Ginny Sargent

Abstract

Non-communicable disease (NCD) incidence and prevalence is of central concern to most nations, along with international agencies such as the UN, OECD, IMF and World Bank. As a result, the search has begun for 'causes of the cause' behind health risks and behaviours responsible for the major NCDs. As part of this effort, researchers are turning their attention to charting the temporal nature of societal changes that might be associated with the rapid rise in NCDs. From this, the experience of time and its allocation are increasingly understood to be key individual and societal resources for health. The interdisciplinary study outlined in this paper will produce a systematic analysis of the behavioural health dimensions, or 'health time economies' (quantity and quality of time necessary for the practice of health behaviours), that have accompanied labour market transitions of the last 30 years--the period in which so many NCDs have risen sharply.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 22%
Psychology 7 14%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 15 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 June 2015.
All research outputs
#7,978,130
of 25,478,886 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#8,864
of 17,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,159
of 268,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#135
of 293 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,478,886 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 268,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 293 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.