↓ Skip to main content

Pediatric Concerns Due to Expanded Cannabis Use: Unintended Consequences of Legalization

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Toxicology, May 2016
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
Title
Pediatric Concerns Due to Expanded Cannabis Use: Unintended Consequences of Legalization
Published in
Journal of Medical Toxicology, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13181-016-0552-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

George Sam Wang

Abstract

An "unintended consequence" of marijuana legalization is the impact on the pediatric population. From prenatal exposure to unintentional childhood exposures, through concerns of adolescence abuse and marijuana use for medicinal indications in children, marijuana exposure can affect pediatric patients at every stage in childhood. Regardless of the stage or reason of exposure, concerns exist about short-term and long-term consequences in a child's physical and mental health. The use of cannabidiol (CBD) may have some benefit for the treatment of epilepsy, but emphasis needs to be on rigorous clinical trials to evaluate efficacy and safety. As more states allow both medical and recreational marijuana, availability and prevalence of use will likely increase and more surveillance and research is needed to evaluate the consequences on the pediatric population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 224 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 14%
Student > Bachelor 29 13%
Student > Master 21 9%
Other 19 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Other 50 22%
Unknown 60 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 8%
Psychology 12 5%
Social Sciences 10 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 75 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 08 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,198,327
of 24,762,960 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#79
of 706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,518
of 304,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,762,960 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 304,144 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 99% of its contemporaries.