↓ Skip to main content

Quantity and Size Distribution of Cough-Generated Aerosol Particles Produced by Influenza Patients During and After Illness

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 1,066)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
47 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
59 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
261 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
287 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
Quantity and Size Distribution of Cough-Generated Aerosol Particles Produced by Influenza Patients During and After Illness
Published in
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, May 2012
DOI 10.1080/15459624.2012.684582
Pubmed ID
Authors

William G. Lindsley, Terri A. Pearce, Judith B. Hudnall, Kristina A. Davis, Stephen M. Davis, Melanie A. Fisher, Rashida Khakoo, Jan E. Palmer, Karen E. Clark, Ismail Celik, Christopher C. Coffey, Francoise M. Blachere, Donald H. Beezhold

Abstract

The question of whether influenza is transmitted to a significant degree by aerosols remains controversial, in part, because little is known about the quantity and size of potentially infectious airborne particles produced by people with influenza. In this study, the size and amount of aerosol particles produced by nine subjects during coughing were measured while they had influenza and after they had recovered, using a laser aerosol particle spectrometer with a size range of 0.35 to 10 μm. Individuals with influenza produce a significantly greater volume of aerosol when ill compared with afterward (p = 0.0143). When the patients had influenza, their average cough aerosol volume was 38.3 picoliters (pL) of particles per cough (SD 43.7); after patients recovered, the average volume was 26.4 pL per cough (SD 45.6). The number of particles produced per cough was also higher when subjects had influenza (average 75,400 particles/cough, SD 97,300) compared with afterward (average 52,200, SD 98,600), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.1042). The average number of particles expelled per cough varied widely from patient to patient, ranging from 900 to 302,200 particles/cough while subjects had influenza and 1100 to 308,600 particles/cough after recovery. When the subjects had influenza, an average of 63% of each subject's cough aerosol particle volume in the detection range was in the respirable size fraction (SD 22%), indicating that these particles could reach the alveolar region of the lungs if inhaled by another person. This enhancement in aerosol generation during illness may play an important role in influenza transmission and suggests that a better understanding of this phenomenon is needed to predict the production and dissemination of influenza-laden aerosols by people infected with this virus. [Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene for the following free supplemental resources: a PDF file of demographic information, influenza test results, and volume and peak flow rate during each cough and a PDF file containing number and size of aerosol particles produced.].

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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 287 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 285 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 45 16%
Student > Master 38 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 13%
Student > Postgraduate 22 8%
Other 20 7%
Other 58 20%
Unknown 68 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 68 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 5%
Environmental Science 15 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 4%
Other 49 17%
Unknown 97 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 432. 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 22 September 2023.
All research outputs
#66,112
of 25,424,630 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
#9
of 1,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248
of 179,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,424,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,066 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 98% 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 179,168 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 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.