| Title |
Mapping of the US Domestic Influenza Virologic Surveillance Landscape - Volume 24, Number 7—July 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2407.180028 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara Jester, Joy Schwerzmann, Desiree Mustaquim, Tricia Aden, Lynnette Brammer, Rosemary Humes, Pete Shult, Shahram Shahangian, Larisa Gubareva, Xiyan Xu, Joseph Miller, Daniel Jernigan |
| Abstract |
Influenza virologic surveillance is critical each season for tracking influenza circulation, following trends in antiviral drug resistance, detecting novel influenza infections in humans, and selecting viruses for use in annual seasonal vaccine production. We developed a framework and process map for characterizing the landscape of US influenza virologic surveillance into 5 tiers of influenza testing: outpatient settings (tier 1), inpatient settings and commercial laboratories (tier 2), state public health laboratories (tier 3), National Influenza Reference Center laboratories (tier 4), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention laboratories (tier 5). During the 2015-16 season, the numbers of influenza tests directly contributing to virologic surveillance were 804,000 in tiers 1 and 2; 78,000 in tier 3; 2,800 in tier 4; and 3,400 in tier 5. With the release of the 2017 US Pandemic Influenza Plan, the proposed framework will support public health officials in modeling, surveillance, and pandemic planning and response. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 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 | 19 | 30% |
| Comoros | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Israel | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 37 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 54 | 86% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 8% |
| Scientists | 3 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 18% |
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 93. 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 08 September 2023.
All research outputs
#464,604
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#633
of 9,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,492
of 323,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#8
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 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 9,784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 323,955 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 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 90% of its contemporaries.