↓ Skip to main content

The scientific foundation for tobacco harm reduction, 2006-2011

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, July 2011
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
806 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
The scientific foundation for tobacco harm reduction, 2006-2011
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, July 2011
DOI 10.1186/1477-7517-8-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brad Rodu

Abstract

Over the past five years there has been exponential expansion of interest in tobacco harm reduction (THR), with a concomitant increase in the number of published studies. The purpose of this manuscript is to review and analyze influential contributions to the scientific and medical literature relating to THR, and to discuss issues that continue to stimulate debate. Numerous epidemiologic studies and subsequent meta-analyses confirm that smokeless tobacco (ST) use is associated with minimal risks for cancer and for myocardial infarction; a small increased risk for stroke cannot be excluded. Studies from Sweden document that ST use is not associated with benign gastrointestinal disorders and chronic inflammatory diseases. Although any form of nicotine should be avoided during pregnancy, the highest risks for the developing baby are associated with smoking. It is documented that ST use has been a key factor in the declining rates of smoking and of smoking-related diseases in Sweden and Norway. For other countries, the potential population health benefits of ST are far greater than the potential risks. In follow-up studies, dual users of cigarettes and ST are less likely than exclusive smokers to achieve complete tobacco abstinence, but they are also less likely to be smoking. The health risks from dual use are probably lower than those from exclusive smoking. E-cigarette users are not exposed to the many toxicants, carcinogens and abundant free radicals formed when tobacco is burned. Although laboratory studies have detected trace concentrations of some contaminants, it is a small problem amenable to improvements in quality control and manufacturing that are likely with FDA regulation as tobacco products. There is limited evidence from clinical trials that e-cigarettes deliver only small doses of nicotine compared with conventional cigarettes. However, e-cigarette use emulates successfully the cigarette handling rituals and cues of cigarette smoking, which produces suppression of craving and withdrawal that is not entirely attributable to nicotine delivery. THR has been described as having "the potential to lead to one of the greatest public health breakthroughs in human history by fundamentally changing the forecast of a billion cigarette-caused deaths this century."

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 806 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 6 <1%
Nigeria 3 <1%
Burkina Faso 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 785 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 188 23%
Student > Master 88 11%
Researcher 86 11%
Lecturer 65 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 8%
Other 212 26%
Unknown 105 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 149 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 90 11%
Computer Science 70 9%
Social Sciences 67 8%
Chemistry 64 8%
Other 247 31%
Unknown 119 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 07 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,100,562
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#183
of 1,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,423
of 130,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,119 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 130,066 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them