↓ Skip to main content

Symptoms related to new flight attendant uniforms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2018
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
38 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Symptoms related to new flight attendant uniforms
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4982-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eileen McNeely, Steven J. Staffa, Irina Mordukhovich, Brent Coull

Abstract

Flight attendants at Alaska Airlines reported health symptoms after the introduction of new uniforms in 2011. The airline replaced the uniforms in 2014 without acknowledging harm. To understand possible uniform-related health effects, we analyzed self-reported health symptoms in crew who participated in the Harvard Flight Attendant Health Study between 2007 and 2015, the period before, during, and after the introduction of new uniforms. We calculated a standardized prevalence of respiratory, dermatological and allergic symptoms at baseline, as well as during and after uniform changes in 684 flight attendants with a varying number of surveys completed across each time point. We used Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) to model the association between symptoms at baseline versus the exposure period after adjusting for age, gender and smoking status and weighting respondents for the likelihood of attrition over the course of the study period. We found the following symptom prevalence (per 100) increased after the introduction of new uniforms: multiple chemical sensitivity (10 vs 5), itchy/irritated skin (25 vs 13), rash/hives (23 vs 13), itchy eyes (24 vs 14), blurred vision (14 vs 6), sinus congestion (28 vs 24), ear pain (15 vs 12), sore throat (9 vs 5), cough (17 vs 7), hoarseness/loss of voice (12 vs 3), and shortness of breath (8 vs 3). The odds of several symptoms significantly increased compared to baseline after adjusting for potential confounders. This study found a relationship between health complaints and the introduction of new uniforms in this longitudinal occupational cohort.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 20 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Engineering 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 21 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 327. 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 09 November 2023.
All research outputs
#98,220
of 24,778,793 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#85
of 16,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,395
of 453,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,778,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,423 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 99% 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 453,536 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 241 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 97% of its contemporaries.