↓ Skip to main content

Effects of air pollution on hospital visits for pneumonia in children: a two-year analysis from China

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Effects of air pollution on hospital visits for pneumonia in children: a two-year analysis from China
Published in
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11356-018-1192-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Die Li, Jian-bing Wang, Zhen-yu Zhang, Peng Shen, Pei-wen Zheng, Ming-juan Jin, Huai-chu Lu, Hong-bo Lin, Kun Chen

Abstract

Although the effect of air pollution on respiratory health has been identified, few studies can be available to evaluate the association of air pollution with hospital visits for children's pneumonia in China. To explore whether high concentrations of air pollutants (including PM2.5, PM10, NO2, and SO2) are related to hospital visits for pneumonia in children, we conducted a population-based time-series study in Ningbo, China, from January 1st, 2014 to November 1st, 2015. We used a generalized additive Poisson regression model to calculate risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the associations of air pollutants and hospital visits for pneumonia in children and found that these four pollutants were associated with the increased hospital visits for pneumonia in children (1.3% for PM2.5, 1.0% for PM10, 2.9% for NO2, 5.0% for SO2 per 10-μg/m3 increase in PM2.5, PM10, NO2, and SO2, respectively). Stronger associations were observed in the cold seasons and among children under 5 years.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 17%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Lecturer 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 11 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Environmental Science 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Other 10 24%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,867,625
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#447
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,241
of 447,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#11
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. 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 447,762 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 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 94% of its contemporaries.