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 |
Comparison of breath-alcohol screening test results with venous blood alcohol concentration in suspected drunken drivers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Forensic Science International, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.03.019 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pirkko Kriikku, Lars Wilhelm, Stefan Jenckel, Janne Rintatalo, Jukka Hurme, Jan Kramer, A. Wayne Jones, Ilkka Ojanperä |
| Abstract |
Hand-held electronic breath-alcohol analyzers are widely used by police authorities in their efforts to detect drunken drivers and to improve road-traffic safety. Over a three month period, the results of roadside breath-alcohol tests of drivers apprehended in Finland were compared with venous blood alcohol concentration (BAC). The mean (median) time between sampling blood and breath was 0.71h (0.58h) with a range from 0 to 6h. Some hand-held instruments gave results as the concentration of alcohol in breath and were converted into BAC assuming a blood-breath alcohol ratio (BBR) of 2260. The mean venous BAC (1.82g/kg) in traffic offenders was higher than the result predicted by the hand-held breath analyzers (1.72g/kg). In 1875 roadside tests, the relationship between venous BAC (x) and BrAC (y) was defined by the regression equation y=0.18+0.85x. The coefficients show both a constant bias (y-intercept 0.18g/kg) and a proportional bias (slope=0.85). The residual standard deviation (SD), an indicator of random variation, was ±0.40g/kg. After BAC results were corrected for the time elapsed between sampling blood and breath, the y-intercept decreased to 0.10g/kg and 0.004g/kg, respectively, when low (0.1g/kg/h) and high (0.25g/kg/h) rates of alcohol elimination were used. The proportional bias of 0.85 shows that the breath-alcohol test result reads lower than the actual BAC by 15% on average. This suggests that the BBR of 2260 used for calibration should be increased by about 15% to give closer agreement between BAC and BrAC. Because of the large random variation (SD±0.40g/kg), there is considerable uncertainty if and when results from the roadside screening test are used to estimate venous BAC. The roadside breath-alcohol screening instruments worked well for the purpose of selecting drivers above the statutory limit of 0.50g/kg. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 21 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 15 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 17% |
| Engineering | 9 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 23 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 15 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,276,670
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science International
#177
of 4,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,412
of 238,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science International
#4
of 46 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 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 238,079 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 46 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 91% of its contemporaries.