Title |
Validity of two simple measures for estimating life-course socio-economic position in cross-sectional postal survey data in an older population: results from the North Staffordshire Osteoarthritis Project (NorStOP)
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-12-88 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Rosie J Lacey, John Belcher, Peter R Croft |
Abstract |
Since few cohorts encompass the whole life-course, many studies that measure socio-economic position (SEP) across the life-course rely on participant recall of SEP measures from cross-sectional postal or interview surveys. It is also particularly important that SEP measures should be appropriate for the age of the population studied, as the level of missing data has been shown to increase in older people. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of recall of two SEP measures in older adults, age left school and longest job, by examining their validity in a general population postal survey in North Staffordshire, UK. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
France | 1 | 50% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
United States | 1 | 3% |
Portugal | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 30 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 7 | 21% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 18% |
Researcher | 5 | 15% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
Librarian | 2 | 6% |
Other | 5 | 15% |
Unknown | 5 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 36% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 15% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 6% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 11 December 2012.
All research outputs
#15,247,248
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,499
of 2,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,786
of 164,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 164,431 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.