| Title |
Digital divide, biometeorological data infrastructures and human vulnerability definition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Biometeorology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00484-017-1398-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pablo Fdez-Arroyabe, Luis Lecha Estela, Falko Schimt |
| Abstract |
The design and implementation of any climate-related health service, nowadays, imply avoiding the digital divide as it means having access and being able to use complex technological devices, massive meteorological data, user's geographic location and biophysical information. This article presents the co-creation, in detail, of a biometeorological data infrastructure, which is a complex platform formed by multiple components: a mainframe, a biometeorological model called Pronbiomet, a relational database management system, data procedures, communication protocols, different software packages, users, datasets and a mobile application. The system produces four daily world maps of the partial density of the atmospheric oxygen and collects user feedback on their health condition. The infrastructure is shown to be a useful tool to delineate individual vulnerability to meteorological changes as one key factor in the definition of any biometeorological risk. This technological approach to study weather-related health impacts is the initial seed for the definition of biometeorological profiles of persons, and for the future development of customized climate services for users in the near future. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 7 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 September 2018.
All research outputs
#20,431,953
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Biometeorology
#1,192
of 1,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,129
of 315,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Biometeorology
#27
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 315,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.