| Title |
Towards Personal Exposures: How Technology Is Changing Air Pollution and Health Research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Environmental Health Reports, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40572-017-0163-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Larkin, P. Hystad |
| Abstract |
We present a review of emerging technologies and how these can transform personal air pollution exposure assessment and subsequent health research. Estimating personal air pollution exposures is currently split broadly into methods for modeling exposures for large populations versus measuring exposures for small populations. Air pollution sensors, smartphones, and air pollution models capitalizing on big/new data sources offer tremendous opportunity for unifying these approaches and improving long-term personal exposure prediction at scales needed for population-based research. A multi-disciplinary approach is needed to combine these technologies to not only estimate personal exposures for epidemiological research but also determine drivers of these exposures and new prevention opportunities. While available technologies can revolutionize air pollution exposure research, ethical, privacy, logistical, and data science challenges must be met before widespread implementations occur. Available technologies and related advances in data science can improve long-term personal air pollution exposure estimates at scales needed for population-based research. This will advance our ability to evaluate the impacts of air pollution on human health and develop effective prevention strategies. |
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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 141 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 19% |
| Researcher | 21 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 11% |
| Unknown | 36 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 29 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Engineering | 9 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 44 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,775,655
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#129
of 324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,871
of 322,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 322,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.