↓ Skip to main content

Reproductive Investment and Health Costs in Roma Women

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Reproductive Investment and Health Costs in Roma Women
Published in
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.3390/ijerph14111337
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jelena Čvorović, Kathryn Coe

Abstract

In this paper, we examine whether variation in reproductive investment affects the health of Roma women using a dataset collected through original anthropological fieldwork among Roma women in Serbia. Data were collected in 2014-2016 in several Roma semi-urban settlements in central Serbia. The sample consisted of 468 Roma women, averaging 44 years of age. We collected demographic data (age, school levels, socioeconomic status), risk behaviors (smoking and alcohol consumption), marital status, and reproductive history variables (the timing of reproduction, the intensity of reproduction, reproductive effort and investment after birth), in addition to self-reported health, height, and weight. Data analyses showed that somatic, short-term costs of reproduction were revealed in this population, while evolutionary, long-term costs were unobservable-contrariwise, Roma women in poor health contributed more to the gene pool of the next generation than their healthy counterparts. Our findings appear to be consistent with simple trade-off models that suggest inverse relationships between reproductive effort and health. Thus, personal sacrifice-poor health as an outcome-seems crucial for greater reproductive success.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 23%
Other 4 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Social Sciences 3 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 9%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 5 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,567,418
of 12,109,122 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#2,901
of 4,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,631
of 285,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#170
of 289 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,109,122 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 285,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 289 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.