| Title |
Spillover Effects of Long-Term Disabilities on Close Family Members
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40258-018-0391-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diana Pacheco Barzallo |
| Abstract |
Care and support of people dealing with long-term disabilities involves the entire family. This paper evaluates the effect of living with a relative dealing with a long-term disability on the health status of all family members in the household. Using information from the Swiss household panel from the year 1999 to 2003 (n = 18,030), a linear regression is implemented to compare the health status of family members cohabiting with individuals dealing with a long-term disability with the health status of individuals of similar characteristics in the general population. Additionally, a non-parametric graphical analysis estimates the smooth patterns of the results over time. Family members who cohabit with a person dealing with a long-term disability have a consistently reduced health status. The size of the impact depends on the sex and the role in the family. In general, women show the most negative effects. For children, the impact depends on the relationship with the disabled person. Recognizing the presence of health spillovers can help to design policies to better support families. Being the perceived health status a good indicator of the use of health services and mortality, the health system should focus on the entire family, and not only on the patient or the main caregiver. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 57% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 August 2018.
All research outputs
#13,238,691
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#451
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,820
of 329,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 329,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.