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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Hearing Profile of Brazilian Forestry Workers' Noise Exposure
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1055/s-0034-1382098 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adriana Lacerda, Juliana Quintiliano, Diolen Lobato, Claudia Gonçalves, Jair Marques |
| Abstract |
Introduction Researchers studying the hearing health of forestry workers have revealed the presence of a noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in this population and have concluded that the vibration of the equipment, the carbon monoxide released by motors, and pesticides might also contribute to NIHL. Objective To analyze the noise exposure in the Brazilian forestry industry workers and the effects on hearing. Methods The study sample comprised 109 employees of a company that specialized in reforestation. Their participants' mean age was 35.5 years (21 to 54 years), mean tenure at the company was 3.9 years (1 to 13 years), and mean total duration of noise exposure was 12.3 years (1 to 30 years). The existing documentation reporting on the jobs risk analysis was examined, noise level was measured, and pure tone audiometry was performed in all participants. Participants were divided into three groups according to their noise exposure levels in their current job. Results Of the participants who were exposed to noise levels less than 85 dBA (decibels with A-weighting filter), 23.8% had hearing loss, and 5.5% of the participants who were exposed to noise ranging from 85 to 89.9 dBA and 11% of the participants who were exposed to noise greater than 90 dBA had audiogram results suggestive of NIHL. Conclusion The implementation of a hearing loss prevention program tailored to forestry workers is needed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 April 2015.
All research outputs
#20,268,102
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#305
of 645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,535
of 228,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 645 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 228,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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.