↓ Skip to main content

Comparative quantification of health risks: Conceptual framework and methodological issues

Overview of attention for article published in Population Health Metrics, April 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 401)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
3 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
366 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
373 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Comparative quantification of health risks: Conceptual framework and methodological issues
Published in
Population Health Metrics, April 2003
DOI 10.1186/1478-7954-1-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher JL Murray, Majid Ezzati, Alan D Lopez, Anthony Rodgers, Stephen Vander Hoorn

Abstract

Reliable and comparable analysis of risks to health is key for preventing disease and injury. Causal attribution of morbidity and mortality to risk factors has traditionally been conducted in the context of methodological traditions of individual risk factors, often in a limited number of settings, restricting comparability.In this paper, we discuss the conceptual and methodological issues for quantifying the population health effects of individual or groups of risk factors in various levels of causality using knowledge from different scientific disciplines. The issues include: comparing the burden of disease due to the observed exposure distribution in a population with the burden from a hypothetical distribution or series of distributions, rather than a single reference level such as non-exposed; considering the multiple stages in the causal network of interactions among risk factor(s) and disease outcome to allow making inferences about some combinations of risk factors for which epidemiological studies have not been conducted, including the joint effects of multiple risk factors; calculating the health loss due to risk factor(s) as a time-indexed "stream" of disease burden due to a time-indexed "stream" of exposure, including consideration of discounting; and the sources of uncertainty.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 373 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Spain 3 <1%
Kenya 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Other 7 2%
Unknown 348 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 79 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 15%
Student > Master 56 15%
Other 24 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 21 6%
Other 75 20%
Unknown 61 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 24%
Social Sciences 36 10%
Environmental Science 35 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 4%
Other 84 23%
Unknown 88 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 89. 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 06 November 2023.
All research outputs
#448,423
of 24,265,140 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Metrics
#14
of 401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334
of 52,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Metrics
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,265,140 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 52,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them