Title |
Controlling epidemic spread by social distancing: Do it well or not at all
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Public Health, August 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-12-679 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Savi Maharaj, Adam Kleczkowski |
Abstract |
Existing epidemiological models have largely tended to neglect the impact of individual behaviour on the dynamics of diseases. However, awareness of the presence of illness can cause people to change their behaviour by, for example, staying at home and avoiding social contacts. Such changes can be used to control epidemics but they exact an economic cost. Our aim is to study the costs and benefits of using individual-based social distancing undertaken by healthy individuals as a form of control. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 | 13 | 25% |
United Kingdom | 8 | 16% |
Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
Japan | 1 | 2% |
Norway | 1 | 2% |
France | 1 | 2% |
Italy | 1 | 2% |
Ethiopia | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 24 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 40 | 78% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 12% |
Scientists | 4 | 8% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 225 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
United States | 2 | <1% |
Unknown | 220 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 14% |
Researcher | 26 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 25 | 11% |
Student > Master | 22 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 5% |
Other | 42 | 19% |
Unknown | 67 | 30% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 8% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 7% |
Social Sciences | 15 | 7% |
Computer Science | 13 | 6% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 5% |
Other | 62 | 28% |
Unknown | 91 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 97. 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 03 March 2023.
All research outputs
#432,071
of 25,261,240 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#389
of 16,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,018
of 177,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#3
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,261,240 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 177,127 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 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 99% of its contemporaries.