↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Nowcasting for Detecting and Predicting Local Influenza Epidemics, Sweden, 2009–2014 - Volume 24, Number 10—October 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Evaluation of Nowcasting for Detecting and Predicting Local Influenza Epidemics, Sweden, 2009–2014 - Volume 24, Number 10—October 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
Published in
Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2018
DOI 10.3201/eid2410.171940
Pubmed ID
Authors

Armin Spreco, Olle Eriksson, Örjan Dahlström, Benjamin John Cowling, Toomas Timpka

Abstract

The growing availability of big data in healthcare and public health opens possibilities for infectious disease control in local settings. We prospectively evaluated a method for integrated local detection and prediction (nowcasting) of influenza epidemics over 5 years, using the total population in Östergötland County, Sweden. We used routine health information system data on influenza-diagnosis cases and syndromic telenursing data for July 2009-June 2014 to evaluate epidemic detection, peak-timing prediction, and peak-intensity prediction. Detection performance was satisfactory throughout the period, except for the 2011-12 influenza A(H3N2) season, which followed a season with influenza B and pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus activity. Peak-timing prediction performance was satisfactory for the 4 influenza seasons but not the pandemic. Peak-intensity levels were correctly categorized for the pandemic and 2 of 4 influenza seasons. We recommend using versions of this method modified with regard to local use context for further evaluations using standard methods.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 16%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 13 35%
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 20 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,162,713
of 23,975,876 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#7,840
of 9,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,600
of 346,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#105
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,876 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 346,757 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.