| Title |
Monitoring travellers from Ebola-affected countries in New South Wales, Australia: what is the impact on travellers?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-017-4016-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jocelyn Chan, Mahomed Patel, Sean Tobin, Vicky Sheppeard |
| Abstract |
Amidst an Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic of unprecedented magnitude in west Africa, concerns about the risk of importing EVD led to the introduction of programs for the screening and monitoring of travellers in a number of countries, including Australia. Emerging reports indicate that these programs are feasible to implement, however rigorous evaluations are not yet available. We aimed to evaluate the program of screening and monitoring travellers in New South Wales. We conducted a mixed methods study to evaluate the program of screening and monitoring travellers in New South Wales. We extracted quantitative data from the Notifiable Conditions Information Management System database and obtained qualitative data from two separate surveys of public health staff and arrivals, conducted by phone. Between 1 October 2014 and 13 April 2015, public health staff assessed a total of 122 out of 123 travellers. Six people (5%) developed symptoms compatible with EVD and required further assessment. None developed EVD. Aid workers required lower levels of support compared to other travellers. Many travellers experienced stigmatisation. Public health staff were successful in supporting travellers to recognise and manage symptoms. We recommend that programs for monitoring travellers should be tailored to the needs of different populations and include specific strategies to remediate stigmatisation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 19% |
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 19% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 31 January 2020.
All research outputs
#13,431,747
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,513
of 14,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,942
of 419,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#135
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 419,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.