| Title |
Bridging Taxonomic and Disciplinary Divides in Infectious Disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EcoHealth, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10393-011-0718-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth T. Borer, Janis Antonovics, Linda L. Kinkel, Peter J. Hudson, Peter Daszak, Matthew J. Ferrari, Karen A. Garrett, Colin R. Parrish, Andrew F. Read, David M. Rizzo |
| Abstract |
Pathogens traverse disciplinary and taxonomic boundaries, yet infectious disease research occurs in many separate disciplines including plant pathology, veterinary and human medicine, and ecological and evolutionary sciences. These disciplines have different traditions, goals, and terminology, creating gaps in communication. Bridging these disciplinary and taxonomic gaps promises novel insights and important synergistic advances in control of infectious disease. An approach integrated across the plant-animal divide would advance our understanding of disease by quantifying critical processes including transmission, community interactions, pathogen evolution, and complexity at multiple spatial and temporal scales. These advances require more substantial investment in basic disease research. |
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 States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 5% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 30% |
| Researcher | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 40 | 51% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#4,145,236
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#232
of 706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,493
of 125,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 125,256 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.