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 |
Assessment of museum staff exposure to arsenic while handling contaminated exhibits by urinalysis of arsenic species
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12995-017-0173-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Mithander, Thomas Göen, Gitte Felding, Peter Jacobsen |
| Abstract |
Preservation of museum objects with inorganic arsenic compounds and contamination of the surroundings has previously been documented. The present study addresses the exposure of museum staff by measuring arsenicals in urine. After 1 week without exposure, urinary samples were taken before and after handling of preserved skins and analysed by HPLC-ICP-MS for inorganic arsenic, arsenic metabolites and arsenobetaine. The sum of inorganic arsenic and metabolites was an index of exposure. Information about work and seafood intake was obtained by questionnaire. One out of five subjects had a work-related rise in the exposure index of 18.1 μg As/L to a post-exposure level of 37.1 μg As/L. Four subjects had no certain exposure-related increase in the index. The study indicates that museum staff may be exposed to arsenic from handling arsenic-preserved objects and supports the use of specified arsenic analysis to avoid interference from organic arsenic. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Materials Science | 2 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 54% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 May 2022.
All research outputs
#15,899,029
of 25,161,628 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#207
of 416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,354
of 322,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,161,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 322,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.