↓ 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

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 38%

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
#6,524,780
of 11,653,629 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#594
of 900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,662
of 263,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#33
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,653,629 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 263,403 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.