↓ Skip to main content

Nonsmokers’ responses to new warning labels on smokeless tobacco and electronic cigarettes: an experimental study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2014
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 (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
61 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Nonsmokers’ responses to new warning labels on smokeless tobacco and electronic cigarettes: an experimental study
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-997
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy Popova, Pamela M Ling

Abstract

Graphic warning labels are a tobacco control best practice that is mandated in the US for cigarettes under the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. However, smokeless tobacco products are not required to carry graphic warning labels, and as of September 2014, electronic cigarettes in the US carry no warning labels and are aggressively marketed, including with "reduced harm" or "FDA Approved" messages.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Spain 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Unknown 102 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Master 19 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Other 8 7%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Social Sciences 11 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 30 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 February 2022.
All research outputs
#895,700
of 25,305,422 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#946
of 16,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,280
of 259,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#18
of 276 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,305,422 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. 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 259,396 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 276 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.