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 |
Unintentional insecticide poisoning by age: an analysis of Queensland Poisons Information Centre calls
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1111/1753-6405.12551 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karin English, Paul Jagals, Robert S Ware, Carol Wylie, Peter D Sly |
| Abstract |
Data from the Queensland Poisons Information Centre (QPIC) was assessed to determine mechanisms of acute insecticide poisoning in young children (<5 years) and whether age affects insecticide-poisoning patterns. Records of all insecticide-related calls placed to QPIC in 2014 were obtained. A stratified analysis of call patterns by age was conducted. Of 743 insecticide-related calls received by QPIC 364 (49.0%) were for young children. The number of calls peaked in children aged one. Ant and cockroach baits accounted for 39.0% of calls. Sprays, which were found to contain not only pyrethroids, pyrethrins and/or piperonly butoxide but also the organophosphate diazinon, accounted for 25.8% of calls. Mouthing or ingesting a pest-control product and consuming an item/insect after treatment were common mechanisms for children under the age of two. Topical exposure to sprays, via direct application, typically by the child or an older sibling, peaked in children aged two. In 12.3% of calls medical attention for the child was already sought or advised by QPIC. Normal behaviours associated with child development, particularly mouthing behaviours, explained the peak of exposure in one-year-olds. This finding should guide strategies to minimise poisonings in this vulnerable population. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Bulgaria | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,022,525
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#185
of 1,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,334
of 363,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,909 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 363,540 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.