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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Health Equity and the Fallacy of Treating Causes of Population Health as if They Sum to 100%
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Public Health, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2105/ajph.2017.303655 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nancy Krieger |
| Abstract |
Numerous examples exist in population health of work that erroneously forces the causes of health to sum to 100%. This is surprising. Clear refutations of this error extend back 80 years. Because public health analysis, action, and allocation of resources are ill served by faulty methods, I consider why this error persists. I first review several high-profile examples, including Doll and Peto's 1981 opus on the causes of cancer and its current interpretations; a 2015 high-publicity article in Science claiming that two thirds of cancer is attributable to chance; and the influential Web site "County Health Rankings & Roadmaps: Building a Culture of Health, County by County," whose model sums causes of health to equal 100%: physical environment (10%), social and economic factors (40%), clinical care (20%), and health behaviors (30%). Critical analysis of these works and earlier historical debates reveals that underlying the error of forcing causes of health to sum to 100% is the still dominant but deeply flawed view that causation can be parsed as nature versus nurture. Better approaches exist for tallying risk and monitoring efforts to reach health equity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 25 | 34% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 8% |
| Canada | 4 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 31 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 39 | 53% |
| Scientists | 20 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 14 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 134 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 22 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 13% |
| Professor | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 37 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 41 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 67. 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 17 February 2023.
All research outputs
#649,745
of 25,827,956 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Public Health
#1,223
of 12,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,200
of 325,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Public Health
#30
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,827,956 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 325,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.