↓ Skip to main content

Application of quantitative microbial risk assessment for selection of microbial reduction targets for hard surface disinfectants

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Infection Control, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
138 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.
Article details
Title
Application of quantitative microbial risk assessment for selection of microbial reduction targets for hard surface disinfectants
Published in
American Journal of Infection Control, September 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.07.024
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) included problem formulation for fomites and hazard identification for 7 microorganisms, including pathogenic Escherichia coli and E coli 0157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, norovirus, Pseudomonas spp, Salmonella spp, and Staphylococcus aureus. The goal was to address a risk-based process for choosing the log10 reduction recommendations, in contrast to the current US Environmental Protection Agency requirements.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 137 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 22%
Student > Master 17 12%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 33 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 16%
Environmental Science 20 14%
Engineering 16 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 5%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 44 32%
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 01 November 2021.
All research outputs
#8,960,165
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Infection Control
#2,173
of 5,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,813
of 288,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Infection Control
#19
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 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 5,099 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 288,293 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 68% of its contemporaries.