| Title |
Adverse Effects of e-Cigarette Exposures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-013-9807-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Lee Cantrell |
| Abstract |
In 2007, a new source of nicotine exposure was introduced to the United States market, the electronic cigarette (ECIG) or "e-cigarette". Since then, the USA ECIG market has been doubling annually. Despite their widespread popularity, there is a paucity of existing data regarding ECIG toxicity. We report the experience of a statewide poison system. The database of a statewide poison system was queried for human ECIG exposures from 2010 (when Poisindex code first generated) through 2012. Year, age, manner and route of exposure, estimate exposure amount, product concentration, if evaluated at healthcare facility and symptoms were recorded. A total of 35 cases were identified--4 in 2010, 12 in 2011, 19 in 2012. Age range 8 months-60 years. Reported symptoms were mild and transient. Five patients were evaluated in an emergency department and none were admitted. Product concentrations ranged from 4 to 30 mg of nicotine per ml. Poison centers are likely to see an increase in exposures to ECIG given their growing popularity. Our modest results suggest that adverse effects and accidental exposures to ECIG cartridges are unlikely to result in serious toxicity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 | 4 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 22% |
| Germany | 3 | 17% |
| Jamaica | 1 | 6% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 6% |
| Denmark | 1 | 6% |
| Poland | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 89% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Researcher | 11 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 22 | 23% |
| Unknown | 9 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 10% |
| Psychology | 8 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 05 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,460,938
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#85
of 1,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,644
of 308,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,223 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 308,839 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 23 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.