↓ Skip to main content

Cross-sectional relations of race and poverty status to cardiovascular risk factors in the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Lifespan (HANDLS) study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Cross-sectional relations of race and poverty status to cardiovascular risk factors in the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Lifespan (HANDLS) study
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2945-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shari R. Waldstein, Danielle L. Beatty Moody, Jessica M. McNeely, Allyssa J. Allen, Mollie R. Sprung, Mauli T. Shah, Elias Al’Najjar, Michele K. Evans, Alan B. Zonderman

Abstract

Examine interactive relations of race and poverty status with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in a socioeconomically diverse sample of urban-dwelling African American (AA) and White adults. Participants were 2,270 AAs and Whites (57 % AA; 57 % female; ages 30-64 years) who completed the first wave of the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span (HANDLS) study. CVD risk factors assessed included body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), total cholesterol (TC), high- and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C, LDL-C), triglycerides (TG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP), and systolic, diastolic, and pulse pressure (SBP, DBP, PP). Interactive and independent relations of race, poverty status, and sex were examined for each outcome via ordinary least squares regression adjusted for age, education, literacy, substance use, depressive symptoms, perceived health care barriers, medical co-morbidities, and medications. Significant interactions of race and poverty status (p's < .05) indicated that AAs living in poverty had lower BMI and WC and higher HDL-C than non-poverty AAs, whereas Whites living in poverty had higher BMI and WC and lower HDL-C than non-poverty Whites. Main effects of race revealed that AAs had higher levels of HbA1c, SBP, and PP, and Whites had higher levels of TC, LDL-C and TG (p's < .05). Poverty status moderated race differences for BMI, WC, and HDL-C, conveying increased risk among Whites living in poverty, but reduced risk in their AA counterparts. Race differences for six additional risk factors withstood extensive statistical adjustments including SES indicators.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Researcher 6 6%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 25%
Psychology 15 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 29 27%
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 16 March 2016.
All research outputs
#12,950,089
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#8,984
of 14,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,328
of 299,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#128
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,892 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 299,541 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.