You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Electronic cigarettes: a systematic review of available studies on health risk assessment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reviews on Environmental Health, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1515/reveh-2015-0075 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aziemah Zulkifli, Emilia Zainal Abidin, Najihah Zainol Abidin, Amer Siddiq Amer Nordin, Sarva Mangala Praveena, Sharifah Norkhadijah Syed Ismail, Irniza Rasdi, Karmegam Karuppiah, Anita Abd Rahman |
| Abstract |
This paper primarily aimed to review articles which specifically quantified the risk of electronic cigarette's (e-cigarette) usage via the health risk assessment (HRA) approach. Systematic literature searches were conducted using PubMed search engine databases. Search terms such as "electronic cigarette", "e-cigarette", "electronic nicotine delivery systems", "electronic cigarette liquid", "electronic cigarette vapors", and "health risk assessment" were used to identify the relevant articles to be included in this review. To enable comparison, hazard quotient (HQ) and lifetime cancer risk (LCR) for the chemicals measured in the selected articles were calculated for three of the articles using the formula: [1] HQ=average daily dose (ADD)/reference dose (RfD) or exposure air concentration (EC)/reference concentration (RfC); [2] LCR=lifetime average daily dose (LADD) × cancer slope factor (CSF) or exposure air concentration (EC) × inhalation unit risk (IUR). Four articles pertaining to HRA of e-cigarettes were critically reviewed, three of the papers focused on specific chemicals namely nicotine, propylene glycol (PG), glycerol and 1,2-propanediol, while one article evaluated the health risks posed by heavy metals contained in e-cigarettes. The calculated HQs for the chemicals in this review had large variations. HQs of the six chemicals, i.e. nicotine, PG, glycerol, cadmium, ethylene glycol, nickel, aluminum and titanium, were found to have the potential to contribute to non-carcinogenic health risks. None of the LCR calculated had risks exceeding the acceptable limit. There are limited HRA studies and the ones that were available provided inconsistent scientific evidences on the health risk characterization arising from the usage of e-cigarettes. As such, there is a need to perform more studies on HRA of e-cigarettes by using uniformed and comprehensive steps and similar reference threshold levels of exposures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Latvia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 113 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 21% |
| Unknown | 23 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 13 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
| Psychology | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 23% |
| Unknown | 33 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 04 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,572,696
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Reviews on Environmental Health
#135
of 405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,158
of 313,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reviews on Environmental Health
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 405 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 313,611 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.