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 |
A transdisciplinary model to inform randomized clinical trial methods for electronic cigarette evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-016-2792-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexa A. Lopez, Caroline O. Cobb, Jessica M. Yingst, Susan Veldheer, Shari Hrabovsky, Miao-Shan Yen, Jonathan Foulds, Thomas Eissenberg |
| Abstract |
This study is a systematic evaluation of a novel tobacco product, electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) using a two-site, four-arm, 6-month, parallel-group randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a follow-up to 9 months. Virginia Commonwealth University is the primary site and Penn State University is the secondary site. This RCT design is important because it is informed by analytical work, clinical laboratory results, and qualitative/quantitative findings regarding the specific ECIG products used. Participants (N = 520) will be randomized across sites and must be healthy smokers of >9 cigarettes for at least one year, who have not had a quit attempt in the prior month, are not planning to quit in the next 6 months, and are interested in reducing cigarette intake. Participants will be randomized into one of four 24-week conditions: a cigarette substitute that does not produce an inhalable aerosol; or one of three ECIG conditions that differ by nicotine concentration 0, 8, or 36 mg/ml. Blocked randomization will be accomplished with a 1:1:1:1 ratio of condition assignments at each site. Specific aims are to: characterize ECIG influence on toxicants, biomarkers, health indicators, and disease risk; determine tobacco abstinence symptom and adverse event profile associated with real-world ECIG use; and examine the influence of ECIG use on conventional tobacco product use. Liquid nicotine concentration-related differences on these study outcomes are predicted. Participants and research staff in contact with participants will be blinded to the nicotine concentration in the ECIG conditions. Results from this study will inform knowledge concerning ECIG use as well as demonstrate a model that may be applied to other novel tobacco products. The model of using prior empirical testing of ECIG devices should be considered in other RCT evaluations. TRN: NCT02342795 , registered December 16, 2014. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 3 | 60% |
| Hungary | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Romania | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 11% |
| Psychology | 7 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 32 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 August 2022.
All research outputs
#14,217,192
of 24,273,038 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,025
of 16,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,335
of 303,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#140
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,273,038 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 303,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.