↓ Skip to main content

Implications of Tourist–Macaque Interactions for Disease Transmission

Overview of attention for article published in EcoHealth, November 2017
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
45 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Implications of Tourist–Macaque Interactions for Disease Transmission
Published in
EcoHealth, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10393-017-1284-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charlotte Carne, Stuart Semple, Ann MacLarnon, Bonaventura Majolo, Laëtitia Maréchal

Abstract

During wildlife tourism, proximity or actual contact between people and animals may lead to a significant risk of anthropozoonotic disease transmission. In this paper, we use social network analysis, disease simulation modelling and data on animal health and behaviour to investigate such risks at a site in Morocco, where tourists come to see wild Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus). Measures of individual macaques' network centrality-an index of the strength and distribution of their social relationships and thus potentially their ability to spread disease-did not show clear and consistent relationships with their time spent in close proximity to, or rate of interacting with, tourists. Disease simulation modelling indicated that while higher-ranked animals had a significantly greater ability to spread disease within the group, in absolute terms there was little difference in the size of outbreaks that different individuals were predicted to cause. We observed a high rate of physical contact and close proximity between humans and macaques, including during three periods when the macaques were coughing and sneezing heavily, highlighting the potential risk of disease transmission. We recommend that general disease prevention strategies, such as those aimed at reducing opportunities for contact between tourists and macaques, should be adopted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 22%
Environmental Science 11 13%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 9%
Psychology 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,286,044
of 24,896,578 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#71
of 741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,390
of 443,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,896,578 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 741 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 443,120 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 95% of its contemporaries.