| Title |
Effect of Live Poultry Market Interventions on Influenza A(H7N9) Virus, Guangdong, China - Volume 22, Number 12—December 2016 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2212.160450 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jie Wu, Jing Lu, Nuno R. Faria, Xianqiao Zeng, Yingchao Song, Lirong Zou, Lina Yi, Lijun Liang, Hanzhong Ni, Min Kang, Xin Zhang, Guofeng Huang, Haojie Zhong, Thomas A. Bowden, Jayna Raghwani, Jianfeng He, Xiang He, Jinyan Lin, Marion Koopmans, Oliver G. Pybus, Changwen Ke |
| Abstract |
Since March 2013, three waves of human infection with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus have been detected in China. To investigate virus transmission within and across epidemic waves, we used surveillance data and whole-genome analysis of viruses sampled in Guangdong during 2013-2015. We observed a geographic shift of human A(H7N9) infections from the second to the third waves. Live poultry market interventions were undertaken in epicenter cities; however, spatial phylogenetic analysis indicated that the third-wave outbreaks in central Guangdong most likely resulted from local virus persistence rather than introduction from elsewhere. Although the number of clinical cases in humans declined by 35% from the second to the third waves, the genetic diversity of third-wave viruses in Guangdong increased. Our results highlight the epidemic risk to a region reporting comparatively few A(H7N9) cases. Moreover, our results suggest that live-poultry market interventions cannot completely halt A(H7N9) virus persistence and dissemination. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Denmark | 1 | 11% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 22% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Vietnam | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 9% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 31 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,307,511
of 24,051,764 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#2,424
of 9,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,206
of 423,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#40
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,051,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 423,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 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.