↓ Skip to main content

Is tree loss associated with cardiovascular-disease risk in the Women's Health Initiative? A natural experiment

Overview of attention for article published in Health & Place, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
156 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
Is tree loss associated with cardiovascular-disease risk in the Women's Health Initiative? A natural experiment
Published in
Health & Place, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.08.007
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Data from the Women's Health Initiative were used to quantify the relationship between the loss of trees to an invasive forest pest-the emerald ash borer-and cardiovascular disease. We estimated a semi-parametric Cox proportional hazards model of time to cardiovascular disease, adjusting for confounders. We defined the incidence of cardiovascular disease as acute myocardial infarction requiring overnight hospitalization, silent MI determined from serial electrocardiograms, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, or death from coronary heart disease. Women living in a county infested with emerald ash borer had an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (HR=1.25, 95% CI: 1.20-1.31).

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 10 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 156 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 States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 153 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Master 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 36 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 23 15%
Social Sciences 17 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 7%
Psychology 10 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Other 31 20%
Unknown 55 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 04 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,362,749
of 32,902,820 outputs
Outputs from Health & Place
#207
of 2,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,346
of 294,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health & Place
#4
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,902,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,130 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.9. 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 294,124 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 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.