↓ Skip to main content

The Impacts of Heatwaves on Mortality Differ with Different Study Periods: A Multi-City Time Series Investigation

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The Impacts of Heatwaves on Mortality Differ with Different Study Periods: A Multi-City Time Series Investigation
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0134233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiao Yu Wang, Yuming Guo, Gerry FitzGerald, Peter Aitken, Vivienne Tippett, Dong Chen, Xiaoming Wang, Shilu Tong

Abstract

Different locations and study periods were used in the assessment of the relationships between heatwaves and mortality. However, little is known about the comparability and consistency of the previous effect estimates in the literature. This study assessed the heatwave-mortality relationship using different study periods in the three largest Australian cities (Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney). Daily data on climatic variables and mortality for the three cities were obtained from relevant government agencies between 1988 and 2011. A consistent definition of heatwaves was used for these cities. Poisson generalised additive model was fitted to assess the impact of heatwaves on mortality. Non-accidental and circulatory mortality significantly increased during heatwaves across the three cities even with different heatwave definitions and study periods. Using the summer data resulted in the largest increase in effect estimates compared to those using the warm season or the whole year data. The findings may have implications for developing standard approaches to evaluating the heatwave-mortality relationship and advancing heat health warning systems. It also provides an impetus to methodological advance for assessing climate change-related health consequences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hong Kong 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 13 18%
Social Sciences 10 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,232,642
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#116,545
of 194,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,442
of 263,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,399
of 6,189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 263,394 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.