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 |
An Evaluation of On-Tool Shrouds for Controlling Respirable Crystalline Silica in Restoration Stone Work
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Work Exposures and Health, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1093/annhyg/meu069 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine B. Healy, Marie A. Coggins, Martie Van Tongeren, Laura MacCalman, Padraic McGowan |
| Abstract |
The task of grinding sandstone with a 5-inch angle grinder is a major source of exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS), known to cause diseases such as silicosis and lung cancer among workers who work with these materials. A shroud may be a suitable engineering control for this task. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of four commercially available shrouds at reducing respirable dust and RCS levels during the task of grinding sandstone using tools and accessories typical of restoration stone work. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Chile | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 September 2014.
All research outputs
#16,578,616
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Work Exposures and Health
#946
of 1,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,696
of 263,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Work Exposures and Health
#13
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 263,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.