↓ Skip to main content

Sexual orientation identity and tobacco and hazardous alcohol use: findings from a cross-sectional English population survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, October 2017
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Sexual orientation identity and tobacco and hazardous alcohol use: findings from a cross-sectional English population survey
Published in
BMJ Open, October 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015058
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lion Shahab, Jamie Brown, Gareth Hagger-Johnson, Susan Michie, Joanna Semlyen, Robert West, Catherine Meads

Abstract

To assess the association between tobacco and hazardous alcohol use and sexual orientation and whether such an association could be explained by other sociodemographic characteristics. Cross-sectional household survey conducted in 2014-2016. England, UK. Representative English population sample (pooled n=43 866). Sexual orientation identity (lesbian/gay, bisexual, heterosexual, prefer-not-to-say); current tobacco and hazardous alcohol use (defined as Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Score ≥8). All outcomes were self-reported. Due to interactions between sexual orientation and gender for substance use, analyses were stratified by gender. Tobacco use prevalence was significantly higher among lesbian/gay (women: 24.9%, 95% CI 19.2% to 32.6%; men: 25.9%, 95% CI 21.3% to 31.0%) and bisexual participants (women: 32.4%, 95% CI 25.9% to 39.6%; men: 30.7%, 95% CI 23.7% to 30.7%) and significantly lower for prefer-not-to-say participants in women (15.5%, 95% CI 13.5% to 17.8%) but not men (22.7%, 95% CI 20.3% to 25.3%) compared with heterosexual participants (women: 17.5%, 95% CI 17.0% to 18.0%; men: 20.4%, 95% CI 19.9% to 21.0%; p<0.001 for omnibus test). Similarly, hazardous alcohol use was significantly more prevalent for lesbian/gay (women: 19.0%, 95% CI 14.0% to 25.3%; men: 30.0%, 25.2%-35.3%) and bisexual participants (women: 24.4%, 95% CI 18.7% to 31.3%; men: 24.3%, 95% CI 17.9% to 32.1%) and lower for prefer-not-to-say participants (women: 4.1%, 95% CI 3.0% to 5.4%; men: 13.7%; 95% CI 11.8% to 16.0%) compared with heterosexuals (women: 8.3%, 95% CI 7.9% to 8.7%; men: 18.4%, 95% CI 17.9% to 18.9%; p<0.001 for omnibus test). However, after adjusting for sociodemographic confounders, tobacco use was similar across all sexual orientation groups among both women and men. By contrast, sexual orientation differences in hazardous alcohol use remained even after adjustment among women but not for bisexual and gay men. In England, higher rates of tobacco use among sexual minority men and women appear to be attributable to other sociodemographic factors. Higher rates of hazardous alcohol use among sexual minority men may also be attributable to these factors, whereas this is not the case for sexual minority women.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 7 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 14%
Psychology 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 22 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 01 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,906,596
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#3,625
of 25,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,406
of 338,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#113
of 628 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 338,212 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 628 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.