↓ Skip to main content

Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance

Overview of attention for article published in EHP toxicogenomics journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#35 of 8,447)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
674 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
808 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
Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance
Published in
EHP toxicogenomics journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, September 2012
DOI 10.1289/ehp.1104789
Pubmed ID
Authors

Usha Satish, Mark J. Mendell, Krishnamurthy Shekhar, Toshifumi Hotchi, Douglas Sullivan, Siegfried Streufert, William J. Fisk

Abstract

Associations of higher indoor carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations with impaired work performance, increased health symptoms, and poorer perceived air quality have been attributed to correlation of indoor CO2 with concentrations of other indoor air pollutants that are also influenced by rates of outdoor-air ventilation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 283 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 808 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 797 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 130 16%
Student > Master 119 15%
Researcher 96 12%
Student > Bachelor 85 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 4%
Other 121 15%
Unknown 224 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 196 24%
Environmental Science 90 11%
Energy 30 4%
Computer Science 23 3%
Psychology 22 3%
Other 170 21%
Unknown 277 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 684. 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 24 March 2024.
All research outputs
#30,974
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from EHP toxicogenomics journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
#35
of 8,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99
of 189,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EHP toxicogenomics journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
#1
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 189,278 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.