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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
On the relationship between functional hearing and depression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Audiology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3109/14992027.2015.1046503 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gitte Keidser, Mark Seeto, Mary Rudner, Staffan Hygge, Jerker Rönnberg |
| Abstract |
To establish the effect of self-rated and measured functional hearing on depression, taking age and gender into account. Additionally, the study investigates if hearing-aid usage mitigates the effect, and if other physical health problems and social engagement confound it. Cross-sectional data from the UK Biobank resource, including subjective and behavioural measures of functional hearing and multifactorial measures of depressive episodes and symptoms, were accessed and analysed using multi-regression analyses. Over 100 000 community-dwelling, 39-70 year-old volunteers. Irrespective of measurement method, poor functional hearing was significantly (p < 0.001) associated with higher levels of depressive episodes (≤ 0.16 factor scores) and depressive symptoms (≤ 0.30 factor scores) when controlling for age and gender. Associations were stronger for subjective reports, for depressive symptoms, and the younger participants. Females generally reported higher levels of depression. Hearing-aid usage did not show a mitigating effect on the associations. Other physical health problems particularly partially confounded the effects. Data support an association between functional hearing and depression that is stronger in the younger participants (40-49 years old) and for milder depression. The association was not alleviated by hearing-aid usage, but was partially confounded by other physical health problems. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 24% |
| Researcher | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 20% |
| Unknown | 25 | 25% |
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 20 March 2023.
All research outputs
#7,752,409
of 23,572,442 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Audiology
#480
of 1,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,230
of 266,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Audiology
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,572,442 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 266,358 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 64% of its contemporaries.