↓ Skip to main content

Childhood brain tumour risk and its association with wireless phones: a commentary

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Childhood brain tumour risk and its association with wireless phones: a commentary
Published in
Environmental Health, December 2011
DOI 10.1186/1476-069x-10-106
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fredrik Söderqvist, Michael Carlberg, Kjell Hansson Mild, Lennart Hardell

Abstract

Case-control studies on adults point to an increased risk of brain tumours (glioma and acoustic neuroma) associated with the long-term use of mobile phones. Recently, the first study on mobile phone use and the risk of brain tumours in children and adolescents, CEFALO, was published. It has been claimed that this relatively small study yielded reassuring results of no increased risk. We do not agree. We consider that the data contain several indications of increased risk, despite low exposure, short latency period, and limitations in the study design, analyses and interpretation. The information certainly cannot be used as reassuring evidence against an association, for reasons that we discuss in this commentary.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 17 33%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 31%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 14%
Engineering 5 10%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 4 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 14 September 2019.
All research outputs
#2,294,481
of 14,493,329 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#429
of 1,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,523
of 213,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#32
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,493,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,163 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 213,139 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 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 63% of its contemporaries.