↓ Skip to main content

Assessing Diet as a Modifiable Risk Factor for Pesticide Exposure

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Assessing Diet as a Modifiable Risk Factor for Pesticide Exposure
Published in
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, May 2011
DOI 10.3390/ijerph8061792
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liza Oates, Marc Cohen

Abstract

The effects of pesticides on the general population, largely as a result of dietary exposure, are unclear. Adopting an organic diet appears to be an obvious solution for reducing dietary pesticide exposure and this is supported by biomonitoring studies in children. However, results of research into the effects of organic diets on pesticide exposure are difficult to interpret in light of the many complexities. Therefore future studies must be carefully designed. While biomonitoring can account for differences in overall exposure it cannot necessarily attribute the source. Due diligence must be given to appropriate selection of participants, target pesticides and analytical methods to ensure that the data generated will be both scientifically rigorous and clinically useful, while minimising the costs and difficulties associated with biomonitoring studies. Study design must also consider confounders such as the unpredictable nature of chemicals and inter- and intra-individual differences in exposure and other factors that might influence susceptibility to disease. Currently the most useful measures are non-specific urinary metabolites that measure a range of organophosphate and synthetic pyrethroid insecticides. These pesticides are in common use, frequently detected in population studies and may provide a broader overview of the impact of an organic diet on pesticide exposure than pesticide-specific metabolites. More population based studies are needed for comparative purposes and improvements in analytical methods are required before many other compounds can be considered for assessment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 3%
United States 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 54 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 25%
Student > Master 11 19%
Researcher 8 14%
Professor 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 24%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 7 12%

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 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#11,188,637
of 14,109,331 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#5,690
of 7,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,553
of 202,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#80
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,109,331 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 202,963 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.