↓ Skip to main content

Use of free-standing filters in an asthma intervention study

Overview of attention for article published in Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Use of free-standing filters in an asthma intervention study
Published in
Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11869-013-0216-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stuart Batterman, Liuliu Du, Edith Parker, Thomas Robins, Toby Lewis, Bhramar Mukherjee, Erminia Ramirez, Zachary Rowe, Wilma Brakefield-Caldwell

Abstract

This study characterizes the use of HEPA air filters provided to 89 households participating in an intervention study investigating the respiratory health of children with asthma. Freestanding filters were placed in the child's bedroom and monitored continuously for nearly a year in each household. Filter use was significantly affected by study phase, season and monitoring week. During the "intensive" weeks when a community education worker and a field technician visited the household, the use rate averaged 70±33%. During season-long "non-intensive" periods between seasonal visits, use dropped to 34±30%. Filter use rapidly decreased during the 3 to 4 weeks following each intensive, was slightly higher in spring, summer, and in the evening and at night when the child was likely to be home, although households did not follow consistent diurnal patterns. While participants expressed an understanding of the benefits of filter use and reported good experiences with them, use rates were low, particularly during unobserved non-intensive periods. The provision of freestanding air filters to individuals or households must be considered an active intervention that requires monitoring and evaluation, otherwise unknown and unexpected patterns of filter use may alter and possibly bias results due to exposure misclassification.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Engineering 4 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 10 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 January 2014.
All research outputs
#17,709,056
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health
#283
of 399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,431
of 213,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 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 399 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 213,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.