↓ Skip to main content

The impact of in-work tax credit for families on self-rated health in adults: a cohort study of 6900 New Zealanders

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (1978), May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
The impact of in-work tax credit for families on self-rated health in adults: a cohort study of 6900 New Zealanders
Published in
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (1978), May 2013
DOI 10.1136/jech-2012-202300
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In-work tax credit (IWTC) for families, a welfare-to-work policy intervention, may impact health status by improving income and employment. Most studies estimate that IWTCs in the USA and the UK have no effect on self-rated health (SRH) and several other health outcomes, but these estimates may be biased by confounding. The current study estimates the impact of one such IWTC intervention (called In-Work Tax Credit) on SRH in adults in New Zealand, controlling more fully for confounding.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 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 %
New Zealand 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 29%
Student > Master 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Librarian 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Social Sciences 6 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Unknown 8 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 November 2017.
All research outputs
#12,428,062
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (1978)
#3,336
of 5,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,975
of 242,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (1978)
#25
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 242,222 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.