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 |
Prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection among coal workers’ pneumoconiosis patients in China: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-018-5373-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan Jin, Huanqiang Wang, Jianfang Zhang, Chunguang Ding, Ke Wen, Jingguang Fan, Tao Li |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) among coal workers' pneumoconiosis (CWP) patients. To estimate the prevalence of LTBI and identify its associated risk factors among CWP patients. A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the prevalence of LTBI. Participants were screened for active TB or a history of TB by X-ray and those that underwent QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT) test. A standardized questionnaire was completed and risk factors were assessed for acquiring TB. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate the LTBI prevalence ratio (PR) in relation to risk factors. Of 244 individuals with CWP (median age 67 years; all male), 162 (66.4%) were QFT positive. In Multivariate analysis, poor workplace ventilation (adjusted prevalence ratio [APR] = 1.26) and intake of fruits regularly (≥4 days of every week) (APR = 0.81) (all p < 0.05) were associated with a decreased risk of QFT. This study showed a high prevalence of LTBI among individuals with CWP in China. Poor workplace ventilation may be an important contributing factor for LTBI. Regular monitoring and dust control measures need to be improved in workplaces to ensure the safety of workers. Moreover, intake of fruits regularly may be a protective factor for LTBI. However, the effect of fruits should be further studied. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Serbia | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 48% |
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 04 February 2024.
All research outputs
#14,580,356
of 25,670,640 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,647
of 17,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,146
of 344,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#245
of 321 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,670,640 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 17,774 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 344,125 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 321 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.