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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effectiveness of Market-Level Biosecurity at Reducing Exposure of Poultry and Humans to Avian Influenza: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Infectious Diseases, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1093/infdis/jiy400 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoyan Zhou, Youming Wang, Hualei Liu, Fusheng Guo, Suhail A Doi, Carl Smith, Archie C A Clements, John Edwards, Baoxu Huang, Ricardo J Soares Magalhães |
| Abstract |
In this study, we aimed to identify the effect of market-level risk factors on avian influenza (AI) infection in poultry and humans and generate evidence that will inform AI prevention and control programs at live bird markets (LBMs). We performed a systematic literature review in both English and Chinese search engines. We estimated the pooled odds ratios of biosecurity indicators relating to AI infections at market level using a quality effects (QE) meta-analysis model. Biosecurity measures effective at reducing AI market contamination and poultry infection at LBMs include smaller market size, selling single poultry species and separating different species, performing cleaning and disinfection and market closures, ban on overnight storage and sourcing poultry from local areas. Our meta-analysis indicates that higher risk of exposure to AI infection occurs in workers at retail LBMs, female workers and those who contact ducks, conduct cleaning, slaughtering, defeathering or evisceration. The most effective strategies to reduce AI market contamination identified in this study should target larger LBMs that are located at non-central city areas, sell and slaughter multi-species of live poultry. LBM workers directly involved in cleaning and poultry processing tasks should participate in occupational health and safety programmes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 31 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 8 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 9% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 33 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 2021.
All research outputs
#7,782,070
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#6,597
of 14,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,929
of 340,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#79
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,796 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 340,655 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 167 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.