↓ Skip to main content

Third-Hand Smoke: Old Smoke, New Concerns

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Health, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 1,371)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
Title
Third-Hand Smoke: Old Smoke, New Concerns
Published in
Journal of Community Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10900-015-0114-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Acuff, Kasey Fristoe, Jacob Hamblen, Michelle Smith, Jiangang Chen

Abstract

While the effects of active smoking and second-hand smoke (SHS) are well documented, the concept of third-hand smoke (THS) is a relatively new phenomenon in the environmental and public health field. This notion was coined in 2009 (Winickoff et al. in Pediatrics 123(1):e74-e79, 2009) but was not really brought to light until the New York Times published an article on the topic (Rabin in A new cigarette hazard: 'third-hand smoke'. The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/health/research/03smoke.html?_r=0 , 2009). Research on THS is fairly new and currently only limited animal studies have been performed that explore the health impacts associated with an individual THS-specific component. The public at large has a limited understanding of this new concept. As such, attitudes and beliefs surrounding THS exposure are still immature. Future research must be conducted to facilitate hazard identification, exposure and risk assessment to address its health impact on susceptible populations and to differentiate THS versus active smoking and SHS. In addition, policies and laws concerning tobacco smoke will need to be reviewed, possibly revised with the role of THS considered as an indispensable component of a broader tobacco control strategy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Master 11 8%
Other 10 8%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Chemistry 9 7%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Environmental Science 8 6%
Other 30 23%
Unknown 42 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 June 2022.
All research outputs
#791,650
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#50
of 1,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,913
of 299,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 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 1,371 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. 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 299,122 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 92% of its contemporaries.