↓ Skip to main content

Epistemology of contaminants of emerging concern and literature meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hazardous Materials, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
11 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Epistemology of contaminants of emerging concern and literature meta-analysis
Published in
Journal of Hazardous Materials, September 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.08.074
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rolf U. Halden

Abstract

A meta-analysis was conducted to inform the epistemology, or theory of knowledge, of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs). The CEC terminology acknowledges the existence of harmful environmental agents whose identities, occurrences, hazards, and effects are not sufficiently understood. Here, data on publishing activity were analyzed for 12 CECs, revealing a common pattern of emergence, suitable for identifying past years of peak concern and forecasting future ones: dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT; 1972, 2008), trichloroacetic acid (TCAA; 1972, 2009), nitrosodimethylamine (1984), methyl tert-butyl ether (2001), trichloroethylene (2005), perchlorate (2006), 1,4-dioxane (2009), prions (2009), triclocarban (2010), triclosan (2012), nanomaterials (by 2016), and microplastics (2022±4). CECs were found to emerge from obscurity to the height of concern in 14.1±3.6 years, and subside to a new baseline level of concern in 14.5±4.5 years. CECs can emerge more than once (e.g., TCAA, DDT) and the multifactorial process of emergence may be driven by inception of novel scientific methods (e.g., ion chromatography, mass spectrometry and nanometrology), scientific paradigm shifts (discovery of infectious proteins), and the development, marketing and mass consumption of novel products (antimicrobial personal care products, microplastics and nanomaterials). Publishing activity and U.S. regulatory actions were correlated for several CECs investigated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 210 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 17%
Researcher 36 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 15%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Other 12 6%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 44 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 64 30%
Chemistry 23 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 10%
Engineering 14 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 62 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#913,010
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hazardous Materials
#138
of 7,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,583
of 263,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hazardous Materials
#2
of 56 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 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,087 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 263,731 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 96% of its contemporaries.