↓ Skip to main content

Reston ebolavirus in Humans and Animals in the Philippines: A Review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Infectious Diseases, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 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
Reston ebolavirus in Humans and Animals in the Philippines: A Review
Published in
Journal of Infectious Diseases, November 2011
DOI 10.1093/infdis/jir296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary Elizabeth G. Miranda, Noel Lee J. Miranda

Abstract

The 2008 Reston ebolavirus infection event in domestic pigs has triggered continuing epidemiologic investigations among Philippine health and veterinary agencies in collaboration with international filovirus experts. Prior to this, there were only 3 known and documented Reston ebolavirus outbreaks in nonhuman primates in the world, all traced back to a single geographic source in the Philippines in a monkey breeding/export facility. The first one in 1989 was the first-ever Ebola virus that emerged outside of Africa and was also the first known natural infection of Ebola virus in nonhuman primates. When it was first discovered among laboratory monkeys in the United States, the source was immediately traced back to the farm located in the Philippines. The second outbreak was in 1992-93. The third episode in 1996 was the last known outbreak before Reston ebolavirus reemerged in pigs in 2008. The isolated outbreaks involving 2 animal species bring forth issues requiring further investigations, and highlight the significance of intersectoral collaboration to effectively address zoonoses prevention and control/response in the interest of minimizing public health risk.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 2 1%
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 178 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 21%
Researcher 35 19%
Student > Bachelor 28 15%
Student > Master 21 11%
Other 8 4%
Other 31 17%
Unknown 25 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 8%
Engineering 8 4%
Other 31 17%
Unknown 29 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 2023.
All research outputs
#1,523,517
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#1,151
of 14,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,071
of 153,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#13
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 14,794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 153,810 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.