↓ Skip to main content

“Defensivos” ou “agrotóxicos”? História do uso e da percepção dos agrotóxicos no estado de Santa Catarina, Brasil, 1950-2002

Overview of attention for article published in História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
“Defensivos” ou “agrotóxicos”? História do uso e da percepção dos agrotóxicos no estado de Santa Catarina, Brasil, 1950-2002
Published in
História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/s0104-59702017000100002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miguel Mundstock Xavier de Carvalho, Eunice Sueli Nodari, Rubens Onofre Nodari

Abstract

The article presents a history of the use and perception of pesticides in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil, between 1950 and 2002. A variety of primary sources were used, including technical newsletters, government reports, agricultural censuses, newspaper articles, data from the state center for toxicological information, and an interview with a key technician from the field. It was found that the use and perception of pesticides passed through different phases in Santa Catarina, much as in other places, with changes in attitude prompted both by the personal experiences of technicians and farmers and by the influence of the broader cultural context and circulation of environmentalist ideas starting in the 1980s.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 5%
Unknown 10 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 4 21%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 5%
Chemistry 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 53%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 July 2021.
All research outputs
#4,681,342
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#486
of 1,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,408
of 422,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#20
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 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 1,628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 422,205 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 57% of its contemporaries.