↓ Skip to main content

Physical harm due to chronic substance use

Overview of attention for article published in Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology: RTP, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
Physical harm due to chronic substance use
Published in
Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology: RTP, March 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.yrtph.2013.03.007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jan van Amsterdam, Ed Pennings, Tibor Brunt, Wim van den Brink

Abstract

Chronic use at high dose of illicit drugs, alcohol and tobacco is associated with physical disease. The relative physical harm of these substances has not been described before, but will benefit the guiding of policy measures about licit and illicit substances. The physical harm of 19 addictive substances (including alcohol and tobacco), consisting of toxicity and the risk and severity of somatic disease (not psychiatric disease) was assessed based on literature data and the professional opinion of experts using scores ranging from 0 (no physical harm) to 3 (very serious physical harm). For alcohol, tobacco and some illicit drugs strong associations between long-term use or use in high dose versus the risk of somatic disease have been described, whereas for other substances such data are not available. Magic mushrooms, LSD and methylphenidate obtained relatively low scores (0.45-0.65) for physical harm, whereas relatively high scores were given for heroin (2.09), crack (2.32), alcohol (2.13) and tobacco (2.10). For cannabis, tobacco, and alcohol the estimated societal disease burden was higher than at individual level. The present ranking solely based on their physical harm was very similar to a previous ranking based on a combination of dependence liability, physical harm and social impairments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 19 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Psychology 5 9%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 22 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 June 2021.
All research outputs
#14,599,159
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology: RTP
#1,597
of 2,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,529
of 210,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology: RTP
#15
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 210,247 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.