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 |
Why Have Tobacco Control Policies Stalled? Using Genetic Moderation to Examine Policy Impacts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0050576 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jason M. Fletcher |
| Abstract |
Research has shown that tobacco control policies have helped produce the dramatic decline in use over the decades following the 1964 surgeon general's report. However, prevalence rates have stagnated during the past two decades in the US, even with large tobacco taxes and expansions of clean air laws. The observed differences in tobacco control policy effectiveness and why policies do not help all smokers are largely unexplained. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 14% |
| Indonesia | 3 | 9% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| Thailand | 2 | 6% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 77% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
| Scientists | 4 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 29 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 9 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 124. 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 17 March 2023.
All research outputs
#339,832
of 25,634,695 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#4,832
of 223,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,177
of 287,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#83
of 4,786 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,634,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 223,726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 287,596 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,786 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.