| Title |
A practical method to target individuals for outbreak detection and control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-11-36 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gerardo Chowell, Cécile Viboud |
| Abstract |
Identification of individuals or subpopulations that contribute the most to disease transmission is key to target surveillance and control efforts. In a recent study in BMC Medicine, Smieszek and Salathé introduced a novel method based on readily available information about spatial proximity in high schools, to help identify individuals at higher risk of infection and those more likely to be infected early in the outbreak. By combining simulation models for influenza transmission with high-resolution data on school contact patterns, the authors showed that their proximity method compares favorably to more sophisticated methods using detailed contact tracing information. The proximity method is simple and promising, but further research is warranted to confront this method against real influenza outbreak data, and to assess the generalizability of the approach to other important transmission units, such as work, households, and transportation systems.See related research article here http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/35. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Cameroon | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 3% |
| Vietnam | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 18% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 15 February 2013.
All research outputs
#1,568,654
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,092
of 3,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,077
of 291,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#35
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 291,391 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 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 59% of its contemporaries.