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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Risk Profiles for Falls among Older Adults: New Directions for Prevention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00142 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William A. Satariano, Constance Wang, Melissa E. Kealey, Elaine Kurtovich, Elizabeth A. Phelan |
| Abstract |
To address whether neighborhood factors, together with older adults' levels of health and functioning, suggest new combinations of risk factors for falls and new directions for prevention. To explore the utility of Grade-of-Membership (GoM) analysis to conduct this descriptive analysis. This is a cross-sectional, descriptive study of 884 people aged ≥65 years from Alameda County, CA, Cook County, IL, Allegheny County, PA, and Wake and Durham counties, NC. Interviews focused on neighborhood characteristics, physical and cognitive function, walking, and falls and injuries. Four risk profiles (higher order interactions of individual and neighborhood factors) were derived from GoM analysis. Profiles 1 and 2 reflect previous results showing that frail older adults are likely to fall indoors (Profile 1); healthy older adults are likely to fall outdoors (Profile 2). Profile 3 identifies the falls risk for older with mild cognitive impairment living in moderately walkable neighborhoods. Profile 4 identifies the risk found for healthy older adults living in neighborhoods with low walkability. Neighborhood walkability, in combination with levels of health and functioning, is associated with both indoor and outdoor falls. Descriptive results suggest possible research hypotheses and new directions for prevention, based on individual and neighborhood factors. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 21% |
| Unknown | 25 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,217,544
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,356
of 10,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,981
of 317,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#42
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 317,602 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 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 58% of its contemporaries.