↓ Skip to main content

Chlorpyrifos and neurodevelopmental effects: a literature review and expert elicitation on research and policy

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 Mendeley
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.
Title
Chlorpyrifos and neurodevelopmental effects: a literature review and expert elicitation on research and policy
Published in
Environmental Health, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1476-069x-11-s1-s5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaret Saunders, Brooke L Magnanti, Sara Correia Carreira, Aileen Yang, Urinda Alamo-Hernández, Horacio Riojas-Rodriguez, Gemma Calamandrei, Janna G Koppe, Martin Krayer von Krauss, Hans Keune, Alena Bartonova

Abstract

Organophosphate pesticides are widely used on food crops grown in the EU. While they have been banned from indoor use in the US for a decade due to adverse health effects, they are still the most prevalent pesticides in the EU, with Chlorpyrifos (CPF) being the most commonly applied. It has been suggested CPF affects neurodevelopment even at levels below toxicity guidelines. Younger individuals may be more susceptible than adults due to biological factors and exposure settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 198 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 37 18%
Student > Master 31 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 11%
Student > Bachelor 23 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 9%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 37 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 7%
Environmental Science 15 7%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Other 50 25%
Unknown 50 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 02 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,114,710
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#244
of 1,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,949
of 177,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#4
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,601 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 well, scoring higher than 84% 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 177,599 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.