| Title |
Cardiovascular health status among Australian adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s155783 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yang Peng, Zhiqiang Wang |
| Abstract |
The American Heart Association (AHA) committee recently set a guideline to define and monitor the cardiovascular health status. This study aimed to estimate cardiovascular health status among Australian adults using the guideline. We used data from a nationally representative sample of 7499 adults (age ≥18 years) from 2011 to 2012 Australian Health Survey. We applied the modified AHA's definition to estimate the ideal proportions of the seven metrics and the overall cardiovascular health status. Ideal status was most prevalent for fasting plasma glucose (83.6%) and least observed for dietary pattern (4.8%). The estimated percentage of ideal cardiovascular health was 0.15% in Australian adults. An estimated 0.52% of Australian adults had all four ideal cardiovascular health factors, and 16.38% had all four ideal cardiovascular health behaviors. There exist some age and sex variations for the ideal status of individual metric and the overall cardiovascular health. The percentage of ideal cardiovascular health in Australian adults is extremely low. Public health policies should be implemented to improve the population-wide cardiovascular health status in Australia. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 67% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,432,085
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#98
of 780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,094
of 450,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 450,901 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 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.