↓ Skip to main content

An Evaluation of Nearly-Extinct Cohort Methods for Estimating the Very Elderly Populations of Australia and New Zealand.

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, April 2015
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 (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
2 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
An Evaluation of Nearly-Extinct Cohort Methods for Estimating the Very Elderly Populations of Australia and New Zealand.
Published in
PLoS ONE, April 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0123692
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wilma Terblanche, Tom Wilson

Abstract

The rapid growth of very elderly populations requires accurate population estimates up to the highest ages. However, it is recognised that estimates derived from census counts are often unreliable. Methods that make use of death data have not previously been evaluated for Australia and New Zealand. The aim was to evaluate a number of nearly-extinct cohort methods for producing very elderly population estimates by age and sex for Australia and New Zealand. The accuracy of official estimates was also assessed. Variants of three nearly-extinct cohort methods, the Survivor Ratio method, the Das Gupta method and a new method explicitly allowing for falling mortality over time, were evaluated by retrospective application over the period 1976-1996. Estimates by sex and single years of age were compared against numbers derived from the extinct cohort method. Errors were measured by the Weighted Mean Absolute Percentage Error. It is confirmed that for Australian females the Survivor Ratio method constrained to official estimates for ages 90+ performed well. However, for Australian males and both sexes in New Zealand, more accurate estimates were obtained by constraining the Survivor Ratio method to official estimates for ages 85+. Official estimates in Australia proved reasonably accurate for ages 90+ but at 100+ they varied significantly in accuracy from year to year. Estimates produced by Statistics New Zealand in aggregate for ages 90+ proved very accurate. We recommend the use of the Survivor Ratio method constrained to official estimates for ages 85+ to create very elderly population estimates for Australia and New Zealand.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 50%
Student > Master 1 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 50%
Social Sciences 1 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 09 April 2015.
All research outputs
#1,002,408
of 4,977,898 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#22,198
of 87,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,047
of 148,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#1,268
of 4,849 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,977,898 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 87,863 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 148,775 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,849 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 73% of its contemporaries.