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 |
Indoor air pollution from secondhand tobacco smoke, solid fuels, and kerosene in homes with active tuberculosis disease in South Africa
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-2892-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica L. Elf, Onyinyechi Eke, Modiehi Rakgokong, Ebrahim Variava, Yudesh Baliram, Katlego Motlhaoleng, Limakatso Lebina, Adrienne E. Shapiro, Patrick N. Breysse, Jonathan E. Golub, Neil Martinson |
| Abstract |
Secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS), use of solid fuels, and kerosene may play an important role in perpetuating the tuberculosis (TB) epidemic. The purpose of this study was to explore the prevalence of household air pollution (HAP) from these sources in homes of someone with TB in a high HIV-prevalence setting. A convenience sample of homes and household members participating in an ongoing active case-finding study in Matlosana district townships surrounding Klerksdorp, South Africa were included. We found a high prevalence of air pollution from SHS, solid fuels, and kerosene among individuals in homes with a case of prevalent active TB disease in Klerksdorp, South Africa. Adults in 40% of homes reported a daily smoker in the home, and 70% of homes had detectable air nicotine. In homes with a history of previous TB (prior to but not including the index case) as compared to those without previous TB, both SHS (83% vs. 65%, respectively) and solid/kerosene fuel use for more than 1 h/day (27% vs. 21%, respectively) were more prevalent. Larger studies are needed to estimate the risk of TB from these types of air pollution in HIV infected individuals and settings with high HIV prevalence. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 19% |
| Researcher | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 6% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 July 2018.
All research outputs
#13,221,670
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,610
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,228
of 326,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#47
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 326,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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 70% of its contemporaries.