↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the risk of acute rheumatic fever in New Zealand by age, ethnicity and deprivation

Overview of attention for article published in Epidemiology & Infection, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Estimating the risk of acute rheumatic fever in New Zealand by age, ethnicity and deprivation
Published in
Epidemiology & Infection, June 2016
DOI 10.1017/s0950268816001291
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In New Zealand, efforts to control acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and its sequelae have focused on school-age children in the poorest socioeconomic areas; however, it is unclear whether this approach is optimal given the strong association with demographic risk factors other than deprivation, especially ethnicity. The aim of this study was to estimate the stratum-specific risk of ARF by key sociodemographic characteristics. We used hospitalization and disease notification data to identify new cases of ARF between 2010 and 2013, and used population count data from the 2013 New Zealand Census as our denominator. Poisson logistic regression methods were used to estimate stratum-specific risk of ARF development. The likelihood of ARF development varied considerably by age, ethnicity and deprivation strata: while risk was greatest in Māori and Pacific children aged 10-14 years residing in the most extreme deprivation, both of these ethnic groups experienced elevated risk across a wide age range and across deprivation levels. Interventions that target populations based on deprivation will include the highest-risk strata, but they will also (a) include groups with very low risk of ARF, such as non-Māori/non-Pacific children; and (b) exclude groups with moderate risk of ARF, such as Māori and Pacific individuals living outside high deprivation areas.

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 60 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 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 25 42%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Engineering 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 25 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 June 2022.
All research outputs
#7,582,403
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Epidemiology & Infection
#1,359
of 4,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,618
of 344,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epidemiology & Infection
#15
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 344,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.