↓ Skip to main content

Highlighting the complexities of a groundwater pilot study during an avian influenza outbreak: Methods, lessons learned, and select contaminant results

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Highlighting the complexities of a groundwater pilot study during an avian influenza outbreak: Methods, lessons learned, and select contaminant results
Published in
Environmental Research, June 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.envres.2017.06.010
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura E. Hubbard, Dana W. Kolpin, Chad L. Fields, Michelle L. Hladik, Luke R. Iwanowicz

Abstract

The highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N2) outbreak in the Midwestern United States (US) in 2015 was historic due to the number of birds and poultry operations impacted and the corresponding economic loss to the poultry industry and was the largest animal health emergency in US history. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), with the assistance of several state and federal agencies, aided the response to the outbreak by developing a study to determine the extent of virus transport in the environment. The study goals were to: develop the appropriate sampling methods and protocols for measuring avian influenza virus (AIV) in groundwater, provide the first baseline data on AIV and outbreak- and poultry-related contaminant occurrence and movement into groundwater, and document climatological factors that may have affected both survival and transport of AIV to groundwater during the months of the 2015 outbreak. While site selection was expedient, there were often delays in sample response times due to both relationship building between agencies, groups, and producers and logistical time constraints. This study's design and sampling process highlights the unpredictable nature of disease outbreaks and the corresponding difficulty in environmental sampling of such events. The lessons learned, including field protocols and approaches, can be used to improve future research on AIV in the environment.

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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 22%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 13 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 15%
Engineering 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 17 41%
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 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,607,138
of 25,809,907 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Research
#5,875
of 8,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,680
of 330,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Research
#85
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,907 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 330,171 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 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.