↓ Skip to main content

Second-hand smoke in four English prisons: an air quality monitoring study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Second-hand smoke in four English prisons: an air quality monitoring study
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2757-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leah R. Jayes, Elena Ratschen, Rachael L. Murray, Suzy Dymond-White, John Britton

Abstract

To measure levels of indoor pollution in relation to smoking in four English prisons. TSI SidePak AM510 Personal Aerosol Monitors were used to measure concentrations of particulate matter less than 2.5 μm in diameter (PM2.5) for periods of up to 9 h in selected smoking and non-smoking areas, and personal exposure monitoring of prison staff during a work shift, in four prisons. PM2.5 data were collected for average periods of 6.5 h from 48 locations on 25 wing landings where smoking was permitted in cells, on 5 non-smoking wings, 13 prisoner cells, and personal monitoring of 22 staff members. Arithmetic mean PM2.5 concentrations were significantly higher on smoking than non-smoking wing landings (43.9 μg/m(3) and 5.9 μg/m(3) respectively, p < 0.001) and in smoking than non-smoking cells (226.2 μg/m(3) and 17.0 μg/m(3) respectively, p < 0.001). Staff members wore monitors for an average of 4.18 h, during which they were exposed to arithmetic mean PM2.5 concentration of 23.5 μg/m(3). The concentration of PM2.5 pollution in smoking areas of prisons are extremely high. Smoking in prisons therefore represents a significant health hazard to prisoners and staff members.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Master 4 15%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 15%
Computer Science 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 8 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,215,837
of 16,163,645 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,487
of 11,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,753
of 346,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,163,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 346,006 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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