↓ Skip to main content

Regional differences of standardised mortality rates for ischemic heart diseases in the Slovak Republic for the period 1996–2013 in the context of income inequality

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Regional differences of standardised mortality rates for ischemic heart diseases in the Slovak Republic for the period 1996–2013 in the context of income inequality
Published in
Health Economics Review, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13561-016-0099-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beáta Gavurová, Tatiana Vagašová

Abstract

The aim of paper is to analyse the development of standardised mortality rates for ischemic heart diseases in relation to the income inequality in the regions of Slovakia. This paper assesses different types of income indicators, such as mean equivalised net income per household, Gini coefficient, unemployment rate, at risk of poverty threshold (60 % of national median), S80/S20 and their effect on mortality. Using data from the Slovak mortality database 1996-2013, the method of direct standardisation was applied to eliminate variances resulted from differences in age structures of the population across regions and over time. To examine the relationships between income indicators and standardised mortality rates, we used the tools of descriptive statistics and methods of correlation and regression analysis. At first, we show that Slovakia has the worst values of standardised mortality rates for ischemic heart diseases in EU countries. Secondly, mortality rates are significantly higher for males compared with females. Thirdly, mortality rates are improving from Eastern Slovakia to Western Slovakia; additionally, high differences in the results of variability are seen among Slovak regions. Finally, the unemployment rate, the poverty rate and equivalent disposable income were statistically significant income indicators. Main contribution of paper is to demonstrate regional differences between mortality and income inequality, and to point out the long-term unsatisfactory health outcomes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Librarian 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 9%
Computer Science 2 9%
Decision Sciences 2 9%
Other 5 22%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,462,696
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#333
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,100
of 339,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 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 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 339,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.