| Title |
Environmental endocrine disruptors: Effects on the human male reproductive system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11154-016-9337-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. F. Sweeney, N. Hasan, A. M. Soto, C. Sonnenschein |
| Abstract |
Incidences of altered development and neoplasia of male reproductive organs have increased during the last 50 years, as shown by epidemiological data. These data are associated with the increased presence of environmental chemicals, specifically "endocrine disruptors," that interfere with normal hormonal action. Much research has gone into testing the effects of specific endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) on the development of male reproductive organs and endocrine-related cancers in both in vitro and in vivo models. Efforts have been made to bridge the accruing laboratory findings with the epidemiological data to draw conclusions regarding the relationship between EDCs, altered development and carcinogenesis. The ability of EDCs to predispose target fetal and adult tissues to neoplastic transformation is best explained under the framework of the tissue organization field theory of carcinogenesis (TOFT), which posits that carcinogenesis is development gone awry. Here, we focus on the available evidence, from both empirical and epidemiological studies, regarding the effects of EDCs on male reproductive development and carcinogenesis of endocrine target tissues. We also critique current research methodology utilized in the investigation of EDCs effects and outline what could possibly be done to address these obstacles moving forward. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 156 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 16% |
| Researcher | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 15% |
| Unknown | 43 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 15% |
| Unknown | 59 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 June 2023.
All research outputs
#14,153,482
of 25,000,733 outputs
Outputs from Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
#320
of 541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,983
of 408,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,000,733 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 408,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 50% of its contemporaries.