↓ Skip to main content

Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in mortality in small areas of 33 Spanish cities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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.
Title
Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in mortality in small areas of 33 Spanish cities
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3190-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc Marí-Dell’Olmo, Mercè Gotsens, Laia Palència, Maica Rodríguez-Sanz, Miguel A. Martinez-Beneito, Mónica Ballesta, Montse Calvo, Lluís Cirera, Antonio Daponte, Felicitas Domínguez-Berjón, Ana Gandarillas, Natividad Izco Goñi, Carmen Martos, Conchi Moreno-Iribas, Andreu Nolasco, Diego Salmerón, Margarita Taracido, Carme Borrell

Abstract

In Spain, several ecological studies have analyzed trends in socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from all causes in urban areas over time. However, the results of these studies are quite heterogeneous finding, in general, that inequalities decreased, or remained stable. Therefore, the objectives of this study are: (1) to identify trends in geographical inequalities in all-cause mortality in the census tracts of 33 Spanish cities between the two periods 1996-1998 and 2005-2007; (2) to analyse trends in the relationship between these geographical inequalities and socioeconomic deprivation; and (3) to obtain an overall measure which summarises the relationship found in each one of the cities and to analyse its variation over time. Ecological study of trends with 2 cross-sectional cuts, corresponding to two periods of analysis: 1996-1998 and 2005-2007. Units of analysis were census tracts of the 33 Spanish cities. A deprivation index calculated for each census tracts in all cities was included as a covariate. A Bayesian hierarchical model was used to estimate smoothed Standardized Mortality Ratios (sSMR) by each census tract and period. The geographical distribution of these sSMR was represented using maps of septiles. In addition, two different Bayesian hierarchical models were used to measure the association between all-cause mortality and the deprivation index in each city and period, and by sex: (1) including the association as a fixed effect for each city; (2) including the association as random effects. In both models the data spatial structure can be controlled within each city. The association in each city was measured using relative risks (RR) and their 95 % credible intervals (95 % CI). For most cities and in both sexes, mortality rates decline over time. For women, the mortality and deprivation patterns are similar in the first period, while in the second they are different for most cities. For men, RRs remain stable over time in 29 cities, in 3 diminish and in 1 increase. For women, in 30 cities, a non-significant change over time in RR is observed. However, in 4 cities RR diminishes. In overall terms, inequalities decrease (with a probability of 0.9) in both men (RR = 1.13, 95 % CI = 1.12-1.15 in the 1st period; RR = 1.11, 95 % CI = 1.09-1.13 in the 2nd period) and women (RR = 1.07, 95 % CI = 1.05-1.08 in the 1st period; RR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 1.02-1.06 in the 2nd period). In the future, it is important to conduct further trend studies, allowing to monitoring trends in socioeconomic inequalities in mortality and to identify (among other things) temporal factors that may influence these inequalities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 23%
Student > Master 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Unspecified 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 12 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Social Sciences 12 25%
Unspecified 9 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Other 6 13%

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 18 August 2017.
All research outputs
#2,528,901
of 11,626,228 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,584
of 7,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,381
of 264,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#117
of 361 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,626,228 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,998 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 264,854 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 361 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 67% of its contemporaries.