↓ Skip to main content

Clinician Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding Use of Respiratory Protective Devices and Surgical Masks for Influenza

Overview of attention for article published in Health Security, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page

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.
Article details
Title
Clinician Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding Use of Respiratory Protective Devices and Surgical Masks for Influenza
Published in
Health Security, July 2015
DOI 10.1089/hs.2015.0011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

While influenza transmission is thought to occur primarily by droplet spread, the role of airborne spread remains uncertain. Understanding the beliefs and attitudes of infectious disease physicians regarding influenza transmission and respiratory and barrier protection preferences can provide insights into workplace decisions regarding respiratory protection planning. Physicians participating in the Infectious Diseases Society of America's Emerging Infections Network were queried in November 2013 to determine beliefs and attitudes on influenza transmission. A subset of physicians involved in their facility's respiratory protection decision making were queried about respirator and surgical mask choices under various pandemic scenarios; availability of, and challenges associated with, respirators in their facility; and protective strategies during disposable N95 shortages. The majority of 686 respondents (98%) believed influenza transmission occurs frequently or occasionally via droplets; 44% of respondents believed transmission occurs via small particles frequently (12%) or occasionally (32%). Among the subset of respondents involved in respiratory protection planning at their facility, over 90% preferred surgical masks during provision of non-aerosol-generating patient care for seasonal influenza. However, for the same type of care during an influenza pandemic, two-thirds of respondents opted for disposable N95 filtering facepiece respirators. In settings where filtering facepiece (disposable) N95 respirators were in short supply, preferred conservation strategies included extended use and reuse of disposable N95s. Use of reusable (elastomeric facepiece) respirator types was viewed less favorably. While respondents identified droplets as the primary mode of influenza transmission, during a high-severity pandemic scenario there was increased support for devices that reduced aerosol-based transmission. Use of potentially less familiar respirator types may partially relieve shortages of disposable N95s but also may require significant education efforts so that clinicians are aware of the characteristics of alternative personal protective equipment.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

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.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 14%
Student > Master 8 14%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Librarian 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Engineering 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2021.
All research outputs
#11,518,249
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Health Security
#387
of 667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,288
of 300,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Security
#8
of 12 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 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 300,176 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.