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 |
Geriatric study in Europe on health effects of air quality in nursing homes (GERIE study) profile: objectives, study protocol and descriptive data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2049-6958-8-71 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabella Annesi-Maesano, Dan Norback, Jan Zielinski, Alfred Bernard, Cristina Gratziou, Torben Sigsgaard, Piersante Sestini, Giovanni Viegi |
| Abstract |
Indoor air pollution (IAP) constitutes a major global public health problem requiring increasing efforts in research and policymaking that may have special significance for elderly that are likely to spend most of their day indoors and appear to be particularly susceptible to adverse effects of chemical pollutants and bio-contaminants. Yet, evidence existing on the effects of IAP in elderly is scanty. The Geriatric study in Europe on health effects of air quality in nursing homes (GERIE) study aimed to assess health effects of major indoor air pollutants and thermal conditions in elderly (> 70 years) living stably in nursing homes (NH) across Europe. Respiratory effects were particularly considered as airways and lung constitute the first target of air pollutants. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 9% |
| Engineering | 6 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 November 2020.
All research outputs
#5,308,946
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#78
of 307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,583
of 315,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 315,403 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.