↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of epidemiological studies on health effects associated with management of solid waste

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
162 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
318 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
Systematic review of epidemiological studies on health effects associated with management of solid waste
Published in
Environmental Health, December 2009
DOI 10.1186/1476-069x-8-60
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniela Porta, Simona Milani, Antonio I Lazzarino, Carlo A Perucci, Francesco Forastiere

Abstract

Management of solid waste (mainly landfills and incineration) releases a number of toxic substances, most in small quantities and at extremely low levels. Because of the wide range of pollutants, the different pathways of exposure, long-term low-level exposure, and the potential for synergism among the pollutants, concerns remain about potential health effects but there are many uncertainties involved in the assessment. Our aim was to systematically review the available epidemiological literature on the health effects in the vicinity of landfills and incinerators and among workers at waste processing plants to derive usable excess risk estimates for health impact assessment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 318 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 307 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 63 20%
Researcher 43 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 8%
Student > Postgraduate 20 6%
Other 63 20%
Unknown 62 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 63 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 52 16%
Engineering 23 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 6%
Other 62 19%
Unknown 81 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,836,945
of 21,446,675 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#530
of 1,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,266
of 204,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,446,675 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,423 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 204,079 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them