↓ Skip to main content

Cyanotoxin management and human health risk mitigation in recreational waters

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Cyanotoxin management and human health risk mitigation in recreational waters
Published in
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, March 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10661-014-3710-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judita Koreivienė, Olga Anne, Jūratė Kasperovičienė, Vilma Burškytė

Abstract

The occurrence and severity of harmful cyanobacterial or blue-green algal blooms (HABs) have increased in recent decades, posing a serious threat of illness to humans. In some countries, water contaminated with cyanotoxins that is used for drinking or haemodialysis has posed a particularly serious risk. However, it is now recognized that recreational exposure to natural toxins by skin contact, accidental swallowing of water or inhalation can also cause a wide range of acute or chronic illnesses. In this review, we focus on the importance of cyanotoxin management in recreational waters. The symptoms related with HAB poisonings, the recommended safety concentrations limit for cyanobacteria and cyanotoxins in such waters, as well as early health hazard indicators of their presence and their monitoring are all discussed. We also present in this review an overview of the methods developed in recent decades for eliminating cyanobacteria and the toxic compounds that they produce.

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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Unknown 108 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 21%
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 26 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Engineering 8 7%
Chemistry 7 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 26 24%
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 08 February 2016.
All research outputs
#16,172,769
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,407
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,984
of 227,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#5
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 227,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.