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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
SOCIOECONOMIC, CULTURAL, AND BEHAVIORAL FACTORS AFFECTING HISPANIC HEALTH OUTCOMES
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of health care for the poor and underserved (Online), November 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1177/104920802237532 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
LEO S. MORALES, MARIELENA LARA, RAYNARD S. KINGTON, ROBERT O. VALDEZ, JOSÉ J. ESCARCE |
| Abstract |
Evidence suggests that social and economic factors are important determinants of health. Yet, despite higher porverty rates, less education, and worse access to health care, health outcomes of many Hispanics living in the United States today are equal to, or better than, those of non-Hispanic whites. This paradox is described in the literature as the epidemiological paradox or Hispanic health paradox. In this paper, the authors selectively review data and research supporting the existence of the epidemiological paradox. They find substantial support for the existence of the epidemiological paradox, particularly among Mexican Americans. Census undercounts of Hispanics, misclassification of Hispanic deaths, and emigration of Hispanics do not fully account for the epidemiological paradox. Identifying protective factors underlying the epidemiological paradox, while improving access to care and the economic conditions among Hispanics, are important research and policy implications of this review. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 100% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 41 | 820% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 740% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 500% |
| Researcher | 23 | 460% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 420% |
| Other | 22 | 440% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 53 | 1060% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 800% |
| Psychology | 26 | 520% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 240% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 100% |
| Other | 28 | 560% |
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 08 June 2015.
All research outputs
#18,414,796
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Journal of health care for the poor and underserved (Online)
#906
of 1,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,092
of 49,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of health care for the poor and underserved (Online)
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,121 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 49,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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