↓ Skip to main content

Predicting risk of avian influenza a(H5N1) in Egypt: the creation of a community level metric

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Predicting risk of avian influenza a(H5N1) in Egypt: the creation of a community level metric
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5288-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ellen C. L. Geerlings, Claire Heffernan

Abstract

Efficient A(H5N1) control is unlikely to be based on epidemiological data alone. Such control depends on a thorough understanding and appreciation of the interconnectedness of epidemiological, social, and economic factors that contribute to A(H5N1) vulnerability. To date, the control of A(H5N1) in Egypt has been challenging. The disease has been endemic for more than 10 years with a dramatic increase in human cases between December 2014 and March 2015. Part of the problem has been a lack of understanding of the inter-play of drivers, conditions and motives that influence preventive behaviours at the household level. To address this issue, the authors developed a Composite Risk Index (CRI) to inform decision-makers of critical epidemiological, livelihood, food security and risk perception factors that were found to contribute to A(H5N1) vulnerability at the community level. The CRI consists of seven constructs that were individually scored for each community. The seven constructs included poultry sales, previous flock exposure to A(H5N1), human risk probability, sense of control over the disease, preventative actions taken, level of household food insecurity and community norms toward certain handling and disposal practices. One hundred forty female poultry keepers across four governorates were interviewed in 2010 using a mix of random and purposive sampling techniques. A mixed method approach underpinned the analysis. The study used wealth ranking in order to help decision-makers in understanding the specific constraints of different wealth groups and aid better targeting of A(H5N1) control and prevention strategies. Poverty, widowhood and lack of education were among the factors associated with high risk scores. CRI scores in those villages where awareness raising had taken place were not significantly different compared to those villages where awareness raising had not taken place. The aim of the tool is to enable targeting those communities that are likely to be highly vulnerable to A(H5N1) outbreaks and where control and awareness-raising efforts are expected to be most effective. In this manner, policy makers and practitioners will be able to better allocate limited resources to those communities most vulnerable to the negative impact of A(H5N1).

Mendeley readers

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 9 15%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 10%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 17 29%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,283,223
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,351
of 16,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,281
of 336,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#191
of 319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 336,239 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 319 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.