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 |
Trends in solids/liquids poisoning suicide rates in Taiwan: a test of the substitution hypothesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-712 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jin-Jia Lin, Tsung-Hsueh Lu |
| Abstract |
Several previous studies have illustrated that restricting access to lethal methods can reduce suicide rates. The most often cited example was Kreitman's study, showing a reduction not only in gas-specific suicide rates, but also in the overall suicide rates because of the lack of increase of other methods. However, method substitution is still a major concern in the application of the means restriction strategy to prevent suicide. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the reduction in the solids/liquids poisoning suicide rate in 1983-1993 after the launching of pesticide restriction interventions in Taiwan was accompanied with an increase in the suicide rate using other methods (method substitution). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 38 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 10 | 24% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 37% |
| Psychology | 8 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 September 2011.
All research outputs
#17,648,479
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,340
of 14,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,747
of 130,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#174
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 130,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.