The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Health effects and wind turbines: A review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Health, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1476-069x-10-78 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Loren D Knopper, Christopher A Ollson |
| Abstract |
Wind power has been harnessed as a source of power around the world. Debate is ongoing with respect to the relationship between reported health effects and wind turbines, specifically in terms of audible and inaudible noise. As a result, minimum setback distances have been established world-wide to reduce or avoid potential complaints from, or potential effects to, people living in proximity to wind turbines. People interested in this debate turn to two sources of information to make informed decisions: scientific peer-reviewed studies published in scientific journals and the popular literature and internet. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 13% |
| Canada | 3 | 8% |
| Finland | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 70% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 36 | 90% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 5% |
| Scientists | 1 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 358 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 349 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 60 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 57 | 16% |
| Researcher | 48 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 13% |
| Other | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 46 | 13% |
| Unknown | 76 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 67 | 19% |
| Engineering | 55 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 77 | 22% |
| Unknown | 91 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 140. 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 19 June 2024.
All research outputs
#311,811
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#97
of 1,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,067
of 140,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#1
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.4. 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 140,341 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 94% of its contemporaries.