↓ Skip to main content

Social disparities in body mass index (BMI) trajectories among Chinese adults in 1991–2011

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Social disparities in body mass index (BMI) trajectories among Chinese adults in 1991–2011
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0636-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Changchun Fang, Ying Liang

Abstract

Obesity is a serious public health problem in China. The relationship between obesity and socio-economic status (SES) is changing and affected by uncertainty, particularly, in developing countries. The sex-related differences in body mass index (BMI) trajectories are controversial and require substantial empirical data for updating and enriching. This study examined the relationship between SES and BMI in Chinese adults from a dynamic perspective using longitudinal data (1991-2011) from the China Health and Nutrition Survey (CHNS). Then, sex-related differences were determined. A hierarchical linear model was used. SES positively affected the male BMI changes, with faster BMI growth rates in the high-SES males over the past 20 years. By contrast, female BMI was only affected by BMI baseline and residential area. Specifically, greater BMI baseline led to greater BMI growth rate and earlier BMI decline. In the past 20 years, the BMI growth rate has been greater in the urban females than in the rural females. The relationship between SES and obesity is complex in China, and a substantial sex-related difference exists. We argue that this large sex-related difference is due to the rapid economic and social changes that have affected national health and increased the gender inequality and social role restrictions in females. We provide insights for further research and policy recommendations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 19 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Psychology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 22 48%
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 24 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,079,280
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,407
of 1,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,135
of 287,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#47
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 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 1,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 287,815 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.