| Title |
Anthrax Cases Associated with Animal-Hair Shaving Brushes - Volume 23, Number 5—May 2017 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2305.161554 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christine M. Szablewski, Kate Hendricks, William A. Bower, Sean V. Shadomy, Nathaniel Hupert |
| Abstract |
During the First World War, anthrax cases in the United States and England increased greatly and seemed to be associated with use of new shaving brushes. Further investigation revealed that the source material and origin of shaving brushes had changed during the war. Cheap brushes of imported horsehair were being made to look like the preferred badger-hair brushes. Unfortunately, some of these brushes were not effectively disinfected and brought with them a nasty stowaway: Bacillus anthracis. A review of outbreak summaries, surveillance data, and case reports indicated that these cases originated from the use of ineffectively disinfected animal-hair shaving brushes. This historical information is relevant to current public health practice because renewed interest in vintage and animal-hair shaving brushes has been seen in popular culture. This information should help healthcare providers and public health officials answer questions on this topic. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 | 7 | 28% |
| Japan | 3 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 84% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 23% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 97. 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
#416,665
of 24,652,720 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#574
of 9,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,804
of 315,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#8
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,652,720 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 9,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.4. 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 315,481 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 118 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 94% of its contemporaries.