| Title |
Community Variation in Adolescent Access to Indoor Tanning Facilities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-012-9603-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ardis L. Olson, Heather A. Carlos, Rachel A. Sarnoff |
| Abstract |
Melanoma rates among younger women in New Hampshire (NH) are rising. In urban studies, youth proximity to tanning facilities has been linked to indoor tanning, a proven cause of melanoma. Youth access has not been examined in rural settings. To determine on a statewide basis the influence of rurality and community income level on female students' ease of access to tanning facilities, all NH tanning facilities (N = 261) and high schools (N = 77) in 2011 were spatially and statistically analyzed to determine schools with more facilities within 2 miles of the school and greater capacity (fewer female students per facility), for indoor tanning. Schools above the state-wide average for both measures were classified as "Easy Access" to indoor tanning. Among NH high schools, 74 % have 1 or more tanning facility within two miles and 22 % have "Easy Access" to tanning facilities. Ease of access did not differ by rurality. Lower-income school status was an independent predictor of both greater capacity and "Easy Access". While urban and rural teens have similar access to indoor tanning, female students in lower-income communities have easier access. Variations in access by community size and income must be considered in planning interventions to address youth indoor tanning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 15% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Psychology | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 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 22 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,217,843
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#1,097
of 1,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,068
of 165,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#17
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 165,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.