↓ Skip to main content

Cuerpos tóxicos: la percepción del riesgo de la contaminación interna por compuestos químicos en España

Overview of attention for article published in Salud colectiva, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Cuerpos tóxicos: la percepción del riesgo de la contaminación interna por compuestos químicos en España
Published in
Salud colectiva, July 2017
DOI 10.18294/sc.2017.1161
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristina Larrea-Killinger, Araceli Muñoz, Jaume Mascaró

Abstract

This article analyses the social perception of human exposure to chemical compounds and discourses and practices regarding bodily boundaries when faced with internal contamination. Based on qualitative and interdisciplinary research carried out in Catalonia, the social meanings attributed to the environmental and food dangers and risks related to chemical compounds that affect human health, and the place that the body takes in the production of these discourses, were explored. In order to do so, between June and November 2011, 43 semi-structured interviews with workers with some awareness of chemical contaminants were carried out, emphasizing how these people (re)interpret the different existing discourses about internal contamination as well as their perceptions regarding the introduction of chemical compounds into the body and the dangers that these substances pose to health.

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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 24 46%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Engineering 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 24 46%
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 13 March 2021.
All research outputs
#14,814,057
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Salud colectiva
#88
of 272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,961
of 308,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Salud colectiva
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 272 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. 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 308,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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.