↓ Skip to main content

The Network Survival Method for Estimating Adult Mortality: Evidence From a Survey Experiment in Rwanda

Overview of attention for article published in Demography, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
28 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
The Network Survival Method for Estimating Adult Mortality: Evidence From a Survey Experiment in Rwanda
Published in
Demography, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13524-017-0594-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dennis M. Feehan, Mary Mahy, Matthew J. Salganik

Abstract

Adult death rates are a critical indicator of population health and well-being. Wealthy countries have high-quality vital registration systems, but poor countries lack this infrastructure and must rely on estimates that are often problematic. In this article, we introduce the network survival method, a new approach for estimating adult death rates. We derive the precise conditions under which it produces consistent and unbiased estimates. Further, we develop an analytical framework for sensitivity analysis. To assess the performance of the network survival method in a realistic setting, we conducted a nationally representative survey experiment in Rwanda (n = 4,669). Network survival estimates were similar to estimates from other methods, even though the network survival estimates were made with substantially smaller samples and are based entirely on data from Rwanda, with no need for model life tables or pooling of data from other countries. Our analytic results demonstrate that the network survival method has attractive properties, and our empirical results show that this method can be used in countries where reliable estimates of adult death rates are sorely needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 26%
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 15 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Computer Science 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 16 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,856,941
of 25,416,581 outputs
Outputs from Demography
#502
of 1,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,329
of 326,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Demography
#8
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,416,581 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
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 326,594 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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 72% of its contemporaries.