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 |
Portable air cleaners should be at the forefront of the public health response to landscape fire smoke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Health, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12940-016-0198-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Prabjit K. Barn, Catherine T. Elliott, Ryan W. Allen, Tom Kosatsky, Karen Rideout, Sarah B. Henderson |
| Abstract |
Landscape fires can produce large quantities of smoke that degrade air quality in both remote and urban communities. Smoke from these fires is a complex mixture of fine particulate matter and gases, exposure to which is associated with increased respiratory and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The public health response to short-lived smoke events typically advises people to remain indoors with windows and doors closed, but does not emphasize the use of portable air cleaners (PAC) to create private or public clean air shelters. High efficiency particulate air filters and electrostatic precipitators can lower indoor concentrations of fine particulate matter and improve respiratory and cardiovascular outcomes. We argue that PACs should be at the forefront of the public health response to landscape fire smoke events. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 6 | 25% |
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Thailand | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Djibouti | 1 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 75% |
| Scientists | 6 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 18% |
| Researcher | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 34 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 16% |
| Environmental Science | 14 | 13% |
| Engineering | 13 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 9% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 44 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 342. 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 03 July 2022.
All research outputs
#94,069
of 25,109,675 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#45
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,106
of 427,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#3
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,109,675 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 427,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.