↓ Skip to main content

Research in the retirement village community—The problems of recruiting a representative cohort of residents in Auckland, New Zealand

Overview of attention for article published in Australasian Journal on Ageing, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Research in the retirement village community—The problems of recruiting a representative cohort of residents in Auckland, New Zealand
Published in
Australasian Journal on Ageing, February 2021
DOI 10.1111/ajag.12898
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Retirement villages are semi-closed communities, access usually being gained via village managers. This paper explores issues recruiting a representative resident cohort, as background to a study of residents, to acquire sociodemographic, health and disability data and trial an intervention designed to improve outcomes. We planned approaching all Auckland/Waitematā District villages and, via managers, contacting residents ('letter-drop'; 'door-knocks'). In 'small' villages (n ≤ 60 units), we planned contacting all residents, randomly selecting in 'larger' villages. We excluded those with doubtful or absent legal capacity. We approached managers of 53 of 65 villages. Thirty-four permitted recruitment. Some prohibited 'letter-drops' and/or 'door-knocks'. Hence, we recruited volunteers (23 villages) via meetings, posters, newsletters and word-of-mouth, that is representative sampling obtained from 11/34 villages. We recruited 578 residents (median age = 82 years; 420 = female; 217:361 sampled:volunteers), finding differences in baseline parameters of sampled vs. volunteers. Due to organisational/managers' policy, and national legislation restrictions, our sample does not represent our intended population well. Researchers should investigate alternative data sources, for example electoral rolls and censuses.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 18%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 47%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 3 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 12%
Social Sciences 2 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Unknown 9 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 April 2021.
All research outputs
#14,066,964
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from Australasian Journal on Ageing
#543
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,734
of 421,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australasian Journal on Ageing
#26
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 421,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.