↓ Skip to main content

Socioeconomic inequalities and mental stress in individual and regional level: a twenty one cities study in China

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 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
Socioeconomic inequalities and mental stress in individual and regional level: a twenty one cities study in China
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12939-015-0152-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongmei Wang, Xiaozhao Y Yang, Tingzhong Yang, Randall R Cottrell, Lingwei Yu, Xueying Feng, Shuhan Jiang

Abstract

This study will examine explanatory variables including socioeconomic inequalities related to mental stress at both the individual and regional level. A cross-sectional multistage sampling process was used to obtain participants. Data on mental stress and individual socioeconomic status were gathered via face to face interview. Regional variables were retrieved from a national database. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was used to assess socioeconomic variances in mental stress. Among the 16,866 participants, 27.2% reported severe levels of mental stress (95% CI: 19.4%-35.1%). Multilevel regression analysis indicated that lower individual educational attainment and income, and lower regional Per Capita GDP was associated with mental stress. The results also indicated that managers, clerks, and professional workers manifested higher stress levels than those in other occupations. Based on the results of this study individual and regional socioeconomic inequalities in China are associated with mental stress.

Mendeley readers

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 > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 23%
Social Sciences 4 15%
Psychology 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 January 2019.
All research outputs
#7,555,516
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,170
of 1,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,591
of 259,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,929 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 259,282 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.