↓ Skip to main content

Individual and city-level determinants of secondhand smoke exposure in China

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Individual and city-level determinants of secondhand smoke exposure in China
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12942-015-0029-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tingzhong Yang, Shuhang Jiang, Ross Barnett, Sihui Peng, Lingwei Yu

Abstract

Second hand smoke (SHS) exposure is a severe public health problem, especially in low and middle countries, but no studies have examined both individual and city-level variables influencing exposure. A cross-sectional multistage sampling design was used to survey subjects from 21 cities in China. Using a standardized questionnaire individual level information was collected. City-level variables were retrieved from the National Bureau of Statistics database. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was used to assess SHS exposure variation at both the individual and city level. SHS exposure prevalence among non-smokers was 28.1 % (95 % CI 27.1-29.0). At the individual level lower educational attainment and income and higher exposure to tobacco advertising were associated with higher SHS exposure. On the other hand richer cities, and those with more anti-smoking media news coverage, had less SHS exposure. The presence of city smokefree regulations was unrelated to exposure. Given its human and economic costs, reducing SHS exposure should receive greater priority than it does in China. The results point to the need for the enactment of national smokefree laws in order to combat unacceptably high levels of SHS exposure.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Student > Master 3 10%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 28%
Social Sciences 4 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 14 48%
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 31 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,299,108
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#548
of 628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#329,925
of 392,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 392,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.