↓ Skip to main content

Disparity in Total Joint Arthroplasty Patient Comorbidities, Demographics, and Postoperative Outcomes Based on Insurance Payer Type

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Arthroplasty, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Disparity in Total Joint Arthroplasty Patient Comorbidities, Demographics, and Postoperative Outcomes Based on Insurance Payer Type
Published in
The Journal of Arthroplasty, August 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.arth.2012.06.007
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Little is known about how patient characteristics differ between insurance types. We reviewed 293 consecutive primary total joint arthroplasty patients with 12-month follow-up and stratified them based on insurance type. As compared with patients with either Medicare or private insurance, Medicaid patients traveled an extra 160 to 170 miles for access to care, both Iowa Care and Medicaid were more than 3 times more likely to be current smokers, and both Iowa Care and Medicaid had lower preoperative and 12-month postoperative 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and WOMAC outcomes scores. Payer type was a significant predictor of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey physical function at final follow-up in a multivariate analysis. Significant disparities exist between patients with different insurance payer types in total joint arthroplasty, and further research into these differences is necessary.

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 2 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 51 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 %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 14%
Other 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 16 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Engineering 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 20 39%
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 16 November 2012.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Arthroplasty
#3,343
of 4,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,829
of 179,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Arthroplasty
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 179,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.