↓ Skip to main content

Spatio-temporal investigation of the 1918 influenza pandemic in military populations indicates two different viruses

Overview of attention for article published in Epidemiology & Infection, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Spatio-temporal investigation of the 1918 influenza pandemic in military populations indicates two different viruses
Published in
Epidemiology & Infection, November 2014
DOI 10.1017/s0950268814002805
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. D. SHANKS, G. J. MILINOVICH, M. WALLER, A. C. A. CLEMENTS

Abstract

SUMMARY There were multiple waves of influenza-like illness in 1918, the last of which resulted in a highly lethal pandemic killing 50 million people. It is difficult to study the initial waves of influenza-like illness in early 1918 because few deaths resulted and few morbidity records exist. Using extant military mortality records, we constructed mortality maps based on location of burial in France and Belgium in the British Army, and on home town in Vermont and New York in the USA Army. Differences between early and more lethal later waves in late 1918 were consistent with historical descriptions in France. The maps of Vermont and New York support the hypothesis that previous exposure may have conferred a degree of protection against subsequent infections; soldiers from rural areas, which were likely to have experienced less mixing than soldiers from urban areas, were at higher risk of mortality. Differences between combat and disease mortality in 1918 were consistent with limited influenza virus circulation during the early 1918 wave. We suggest that it is likely that more than one influenza virus was circulating in 1918, which might help explain the higher mortality rates in those unlikely to have been infected in early 1918.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 25%
Researcher 3 15%
Professor 3 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 25%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 10%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 November 2014.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Epidemiology & Infection
#4,397
of 4,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,272
of 275,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epidemiology & Infection
#51
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 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 4,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. 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 275,895 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 58 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.