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 |
Remediating buildings damaged by dampness and mould for preventing or reducing respiratory tract symptoms, infections and asthma
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2015
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007897.pub3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Riitta Sauni, Jos H Verbeek, Jukka Uitti, Merja Jauhiainen, Kathleen Kreiss, Torben Sigsgaard |
Abstract |
Dampness and mould in buildings have been associated with adverse respiratory symptoms, asthma and respiratory infections of inhabitants. Moisture damage is a very common problem in private houses, workplaces and public buildings such as schools. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 2 | 29% |
Ireland | 1 | 14% |
Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 238 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 22 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 9% |
Researcher | 18 | 8% |
Student > Bachelor | 17 | 7% |
Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 6% |
Other | 46 | 19% |
Unknown | 99 | 42% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 22% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 12% |
Psychology | 7 | 3% |
Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
Engineering | 5 | 2% |
Other | 26 | 11% |
Unknown | 113 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 10 December 2023.
All research outputs
#2,059,255
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,354
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,264
of 270,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#94
of 278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 270,261 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 278 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 66% of its contemporaries.