| Title |
A Brief History of R0 and a Recipe for its Calculation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Biotheoretica, September 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1016599411804 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J.A.P. Heesterbeek |
| Abstract |
In this paper I present the genesis of R0 in demography, ecology and epidemiology, from embryo to its current adult form. I argue on why it has taken so long for the concept to mature in epidemiology when there were ample opportunities for cross-fertilisation from demography and ecology from where it reached adulthood fifty years earlier. Today, R0 is a more fully developed adult in epidemiology than in demography. In the final section I give an algorithm for its calculation in heterogeneous populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 | 6 | 46% |
| Austria | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 54% |
| Scientists | 5 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 2% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Oman | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 255 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 24% |
| Researcher | 59 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 7% |
| Professor | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 56 | 20% |
| Unknown | 30 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 76 | 28% |
| Mathematics | 42 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 14 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 57 | 21% |
| Unknown | 46 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 August 2022.
All research outputs
#730,908
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Acta Biotheoretica
#2
of 213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#536
of 48,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Biotheoretica
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 48,922 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 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them