↓ Skip to main content

Semantics bias in cross-national comparative analyses: is it good or bad to have “fair” health?

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Semantics bias in cross-national comparative analyses: is it good or bad to have “fair” health?
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0469-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina W. Schnohr, Inese Gobina, Teresa Santos, Joanna Mazur, Mujgan Alikasifuglu, Raili Välimaa, Maria Corell, Curt Hagquist, Paola Dalmasso, Yeva Movseyan, Franco Cavallo, Saskia van Dorsselaer, Torbjørn Torsheim

Abstract

The Health Behavior in School-aged Children is a cross-national study collecting data on social and health indicators on adolescents in 43 countries. The study provides comparable data on health behaviors and health outcomes through the use of a common protocol, which have been a back bone of the study sine its initiation in 1983. Recent years, researchers within the study have noticed a questionable comparability on the widely used item on self-rated health. One of the four response categories to the item "Would you say your health is….?" showed particular variation, as the response category "Fair" varied from 20 % in Latvia and Moldova to 3-4 % in Bulgaria and Macedonia. A qualitative mini-survey of the back-translations showed that the response category "Fair" had a negative slant in 25 countries, a positive slant in 10 countries and was considered neutral in 9 countries. This finding indicates that there are what may be called semantic issues affecting comparability in international studies, since the same original word (in an English original) is interpreted differently across countries and cultures. The paper test and discuss a few possible explanations to this, however, only leaving to future studies to hold a cautious approach to international comparisons if working with the self-rated health item with four response categories.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 22%
Other 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Librarian 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 25%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 11 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,462,696
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,671
of 2,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,824
of 298,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#23
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 298,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.