↓ Skip to main content

Exposure to cooking fuels and birth weight in Lanzhou, China: a birth cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Exposure to cooking fuels and birth weight in Lanzhou, China: a birth cohort study
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2038-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Min Jiang, Jie Qiu, Min Zhou, Xiaochun He, Hongmei Cui, Catherine Lerro, Ling Lv, Xiaojuan Lin, Chong Zhang, Honghong Zhang, Ruifeng Xu, Daling Zhu, Yun Dang, Xudong Han, Hanru Zhang, Haiya Bai, Ya Chen, Zhongfeng Tang, Ru Lin, Tingting Yao, Jie Su, Xiaoying Xu, Xiaohui Liu, Wendi Wang, Yueyuan Wang, Bin Ma, Weitao Qiu, Cairong Zhu, Suping Wang, Huang Huang, Nan Zhao, Xiaosong Li, Qing Liu, Yawei Zhang

Abstract

Early studies have suggested that biomass cooking fuels were associated with increased risk of low birth weight (LBW). However it is unclear if this reduced birth weight was due to prematurity or intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). In order to understand the relationship between various cooking fuels and risk of LBW and small for gestational age (SGA), we analyzed data from a birth cohort study conducted in Lanzhou, China which included 9,895 singleton live births. Compared to mothers using gas as cooking fuel, significant reductions in birth weight were observed for mothers using coal (weight difference = 73.31 g, 95 % CI: 26.86, 119.77) and biomass (weight difference = 87.84 g, 95 % CI: 10.76, 164.46). Using biomass as cooking fuel was associated with more than two-fold increased risk of LBW (OR = 2.51, 95 % CI: 1.26, 5.01), and the risk was mainly seen among preterm births (OR = 3.43, 95 % CI: 1.21, 9.74). No significant associations with LBW were observed among mothers using coal or electromagnetic stoves for cooking. These findings suggest that exposure to biomass during pregnancy is associated with risk of LBW, and the effect of biomass on LBW may be primarily due to prematurity rather than IUGR.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 20 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Environmental Science 7 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,420,033
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,852
of 14,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,295
of 263,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#253
of 284 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,866 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 263,394 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 284 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.