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 |
Impact of Tobacco-Related Health Warning Labels across Socioeconomic, Race and Ethnic Groups: Results from a Randomized Web-Based Experiment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0052206 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer Cantrell, Donna M. Vallone, James F. Thrasher, Rebekah H. Nagler, Shari P. Feirman, Larry R. Muenz, David Y. He, Kasisomayajula Viswanath |
| Abstract |
The U.S. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 requires updating of the existing text-only health warning labels on tobacco packaging with nine new warning statements accompanied by pictorial images. Survey and experimental research in the U.S. and other countries supports the effectiveness of pictorial health warning labels compared with text-only warnings for informing smokers about the risks of smoking and encouraging cessation. Yet very little research has examined differences in reactions to warning labels by race/ethnicity, education or income despite evidence that population subgroups may differ in their ability to process health information. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the potential impact of pictorial warning labels compared with text-only labels among U.S. adult smokers from diverse racial/ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 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 | 8 | 21% |
| Netherlands | 5 | 13% |
| Thailand | 2 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 5% |
| Ireland | 2 | 5% |
| France | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 79% |
| Scientists | 4 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 162 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 22% |
| Researcher | 28 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 22% |
| Unknown | 26 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 34 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 11% |
| Psychology | 18 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 36 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 10 October 2020.
All research outputs
#778,625
of 25,840,929 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#10,289
of 225,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,883
of 294,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#202
of 5,020 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,840,929 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 294,738 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,020 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 95% of its contemporaries.