| Title |
Pediatric Asthma and the Indoor Microbial Environment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Environmental Health Reports, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40572-016-0095-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lidia Casas, Christina Tischer, Martin Täubel |
| Abstract |
The global increase in the prevalence of asthma has been related to several risk factors; many of them linked to the "westernization" process and the characteristics of the indoor microbial environment during early life may play an important role. Living in moisture damaged homes contributes to the exacerbation and development of asthma. However, living in homes with a rich variety and high levels of microbes (e.g., traditional farming environments) may confer protection. While the results of previous research are rather consistent when it comes to observation/report of indoor moisture damage or when comparing farming versus non-farming homes, when actual measures targeting indoor microbial exposure are included, the picture becomes less clear and the associations appear inconsistent. This may partly be due to limitations of sampling and measurement techniques that make comparisons difficult and provide an incomplete picture of the indoor microbial environment and in particular also human exposure. In this regard, new generation sequencing techniques represent a potential revolution in better understanding the impact of the indoor microbiome on human health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 37% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,370,013
of 23,784,266 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#92
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,917
of 341,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,784,266 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 341,077 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.