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 |
The estimated prevalence of exposure to asthmagens in the Australian workforce, 2014
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-016-0212-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lin Fritschi, Julie Crewe, Ellie Darcey, Alison Reid, Deborah C. Glass, Geza P. Benke, Tim Driscoll, Susan Peters, Si Si, Michael J. Abramson, Renee N. Carey |
| Abstract |
There is very little information available on a national level as to the number of people exposed to specific asthmagens in workplaces. We conducted a national telephone survey in Australia to investigate the prevalence of current occupational exposure to 277 asthmagens, assembled into 27 groups. Demographic and current job information were obtained. A web-based tool, OccIDEAS, was used to collect job task information and assign exposure to each asthmagen group. In the Australian Workplace Exposure Study - Asthma (AWES- Asthma) we interviewed 4878 participants (2441 male and 2437 female). Exposure to at least one asthmagen was more common among men (47 %) than women (40 %). Extrapolated to the Australian population, approximately 2.8 million men and 1.7 million women were estimated to be exposed. Among men, the most common exposures were bioaerosols (29 %) and metals (27 %), whilst the most common exposures among women were latex (25 %) and industrial cleaning and sterilising agents (20 %). This study provides information about the prevalence of exposure to asthmagens in Australian workplaces which will be useful in setting priorities for control and prevention of occupational asthma. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 31% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
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 14 October 2016.
All research outputs
#17,797,589
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#1,261
of 1,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,684
of 300,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,921 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 300,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.