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 |
Incident osteoarthritis associated with increased allied health services use in ‘baby boomer’ Australian women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/1753-6405.12533 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lynne Parkinson, Rachael Moorin, Geeske Peeters, Julie Byles, Fiona Blyth, Gillian Caughey, Michelle Cunich, Parker Magin, Lyn March, Dimity Pond |
| Abstract |
To explore impact of incident osteoarthritis (OA) on health services use by Australian women born 1946-51. Secondary analysis of Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health survey data linked to Medicare Australia databases (2002 to 2011). Medicare services use was compared for two groups: OA group (n=761) - reported incident OA in 2007; Never group (n=4346) - did not report arthritis in time frame. Interrupted time series regression compared health services use over time. The OA group had higher health services use than the Never group. Rate of services use increased over time for both groups. Rate of increase in quarterly doctor attendances was significantly lower for the OA group after onset of OA, with no corresponding change for the Never group. A pre-existing higher use of health services is associated with reporting incident OA, compared to those who never report arthritis. After onset of OA, rate of doctor use reduced and allied health use increased, consistent with recommended Australian treatment guidelines. This study provides a rare insight into change in healthcare use for people reporting incident OA, against an appropriate comparison group, highlighting the importance of early diagnosis of OA to optimise effective use of health services. |
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 > Bachelor | 5 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 24% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 May 2016.
All research outputs
#4,836,328
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#724
of 1,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,941
of 333,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,909 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 333,262 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 69% of its contemporaries.