↓ Skip to main content

The impact of multimorbidity on adult physical and mental health in low- and middle-income countries: what does the study on global ageing and adult health (SAGE) reveal?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
318 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
636 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
The impact of multimorbidity on adult physical and mental health in low- and middle-income countries: what does the study on global ageing and adult health (SAGE) reveal?
Published in
BMC Medicine, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0402-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Perianayagam Arokiasamy, Uttamacharya Uttamacharya, Kshipra Jain, Richard Berko Biritwum, Alfred Edwin Yawson, Fan Wu, Yanfei Guo, Tamara Maximova, Betty Manrique Espinoza, Aarón Salinas Rodríguez, Sara Afshar, Sanghamitra Pati, Gillian Ice, Sube Banerjee, Melissa A. Liebert, James Josh Snodgrass, Nirmala Naidoo, Somnath Chatterji, Paul Kowal

Abstract

Chronic diseases contribute a large share of disease burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Chronic diseases have a tendency to occur simultaneously and where there are two or more such conditions, this is termed as 'multimorbidity'. Multimorbidity is associated with adverse health outcomes, but limited research has been undertaken in LMICs. Therefore, this study examines the prevalence and correlates of multimorbidity as well as the associations between multimorbidity and self-rated health, activities of daily living (ADLs), quality of life, and depression across six LMICs. Data was obtained from the WHO's Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) Wave-1 (2007/10). This was a cross-sectional population based survey performed in LMICs, namely China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia, and South Africa, including 42,236 adults aged 18 years and older. Multimorbidity was measured as the simultaneous presence of two or more of eight chronic conditions including angina pectoris, arthritis, asthma, chronic lung disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, stroke, and vision impairment. Associations with four health outcomes were examined, namely ADL limitation, self-rated health, depression, and a quality of life index. Random-intercept multilevel regression models were used on pooled data from the six countries. The prevalence of morbidity and multimorbidity was 54.2 % and 21.9 %, respectively, in the pooled sample of six countries. Russia had the highest prevalence of multimorbidity (34.7 %) whereas China had the lowest (20.3 %). The likelihood of multimorbidity was higher in older age groups and was lower in those with higher socioeconomic status. In the pooled sample, the prevalence of 1+ ADL limitation was 14 %, depression 5.7 %, self-rated poor health 11.6 %, and mean quality of life score was 54.4. Substantial cross-country variations were seen in the four health outcome measures. The prevalence of 1+ ADL limitation, poor self-rated health, and depression increased whereas quality of life declined markedly with an increase in number of diseases. Findings highlight the challenge of multimorbidity in LMICs, particularly among the lower socioeconomic groups, and the pressing need for reorientation of health care resources considering the distribution of multimorbidity and its adverse effect on health outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 636 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 631 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 98 15%
Researcher 74 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 70 11%
Student > Bachelor 54 8%
Student > Postgraduate 45 7%
Other 122 19%
Unknown 173 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 158 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 70 11%
Social Sciences 61 10%
Psychology 35 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 18 3%
Other 77 12%
Unknown 217 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 21 November 2019.
All research outputs
#2,472,017
of 23,876,482 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,587
of 3,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,414
of 266,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#38
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,876,482 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 266,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 50% of its contemporaries.