↓ Skip to main content

Smokefree signage at children’s playgrounds: Field observations and comparison with Google Street View

Overview of attention for article published in Tobacco Induced Diseases, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 591)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Smokefree signage at children’s playgrounds: Field observations and comparison with Google Street View
Published in
Tobacco Induced Diseases, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12971-017-0143-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

George Thomson, Nick Wilson

Abstract

Although there is global growth in outdoor smokefree areas, little is known about the associated smokefree signage. We aimed to study smokefree signage at playgrounds and to compare field observations with images from Google Street View (GSV). We randomly selected playgrounds in 21 contiguous local government areas in the lower North Island of New Zealand, all of which had smokefree playground policies. Field data were collected on smokefree signage along with dog control signage to allow for comparisons. The sensitivity and specificity of using GSV for data collection were calculated. Out of the 63 playgrounds studied, only 44% (95% CI: 33%-57%) had any smokefree signage within 10 m of the playground equipment. The mean number of such signs was 0.8 per playground (range: 0 to 6). Sign size varied greatly from 42 cm(2) up to 2880 cm(2); but was typically fairly small (median = 600 cm(2); ie, as per a 20 × 30 cm rectangle). Qualitatively the dog signs appeared to use clearer images and were less wordy than the smokefree signs. Most playground equipment (82%), could be seen on GSV, but for these settings the sensitivity for identifying smokefree signs was poor at 16%. Yet specificity was reasonable at 96%. The presence and quality of smokefree signage was poor in this sample of children's playgrounds in this developed country setting. There appears to be value in comparing smokefree signage with other types of signage (eg, dog control signage). Google Street View was not a sensitive tool for studying such signage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 22%
Psychology 2 11%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Decision Sciences 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,307,590
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Tobacco Induced Diseases
#30
of 591 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,970
of 325,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tobacco Induced Diseases
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 591 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 325,032 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 92% 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 all of them