| Title |
Quantifying the risk of local Zika virus transmission in the contiguous US during the 2015–2016 ZIKV epidemic
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-018-1185-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaiyuan Sun, Qian Zhang, Ana Pastore-Piontti, Matteo Chinazzi, Dina Mistry, Natalie E Dean, Diana Patricia Rojas, Stefano Merler, Piero Poletti, Luca Rossi, M Elizabeth Halloran, Ira M Longini, Alessandro Vespignani |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 States | 12 | 38% |
| Italy | 2 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 6% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 53% |
| Scientists | 11 | 34% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 9% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 24% |
| Researcher | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 34% |
| Unknown | 16 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,028,655
of 24,046,191 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,363
of 3,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,921
of 352,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#33
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,046,191 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 352,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 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 56% of its contemporaries.