↓ Skip to main content

Adult mortality in sub-Saharan Africa using 2001—2009 census data: does estimation method matter?

Overview of attention for article published in Genus, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Adult mortality in sub-Saharan Africa using 2001—2009 census data: does estimation method matter?
Published in
Genus, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41118-017-0025-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clifford Odimegwu, Vesper H. Chisumpa, Oluwaseyi Dolapo Somefun

Abstract

Adult mortality is an important development and public health issue that continues to attract the attention of demographers and public health researchers. Controversies exist about the accurate level of adult mortality in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), due to different data sources and errors in data collection. To address this shortcoming, methods have been developed to accurately estimate levels of adult mortality. Using three different methods (orphanhood, widowhood, and siblinghood) of indirect estimation and the direct siblinghood method of adult mortality, we examined the levels of adult mortality in 10 countries in SSA using 2001-2009 census and survey data. Results from the different methods vary. Estimates from the orphanhood data show that adult mortality rates for males are in decline in South Africa and West African countries, whilst there is an increase in adult mortality in the East African countries, for the period examined. The widowhood estimates were the lowest and reveal a marked increase in female adult mortality rates compared to male. A notable difference was observed in adult mortality estimates derived from the direct and indirect siblinghood methods. The method of estimation, therefore, matters in establishing the level of adult mortality in SSA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 11%
Unspecified 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Student > Master 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 11 58%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 21%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 12 63%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 06 August 2018.
All research outputs
#6,612,604
of 25,782,917 outputs
Outputs from Genus
#90
of 179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,018
of 342,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genus
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 342,972 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.