↓ Skip to main content

Recent Scientific Evidence Regarding Asbestos Use and Health Consequences of Asbestos Exposure

Overview of attention for article published in Current Environmental Health Reports, September 2016
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 (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Recent Scientific Evidence Regarding Asbestos Use and Health Consequences of Asbestos Exposure
Published in
Current Environmental Health Reports, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40572-016-0109-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manuela Valenzuela, Margarita Giraldo, Sonia Gallo-Murcia, Juliana Pineda, Laura Santos, Juan Pablo Ramos-Bonilla

Abstract

To justify the continuous use of two million tons of asbestos every year, it has been argued that a safe/controlled use can be achieved. The aim of this review was to identify recent scientific studies that present empirical evidence of: 1) health consequences resulting from past asbestos exposures and 2) current asbestos exposures resulting from asbestos use. Articles with evidence that could support or reject the safe/controlled use argument were also identified. A total of 155 articles were included in the review, and 87 % showed adverse asbestos health consequences or high asbestos exposures. Regarding the safe/controlled use, 44 articles were identified, and 82 % had evidence suggesting that the safe/controlled use is not being achieved. A large percentage of articles with evidence that support the safe/controlled use argument have a conflict of interest declared. Most of the evidence was developed in high-income countries and in countries that have already banned asbestos.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 41%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 6 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#4,617,177
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#153
of 322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,362
of 322,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 322,140 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.