| Title |
Zika Virus Screening among Spanish Team Members After 2016 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Olympic Games
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2308.170415 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia Rodriguez-Valero, Alberto M. Borobia, Mar Lago, Maria Paz Sánchez-Seco, Fernando de Ory, Ana Vázquez, Jose Luis Pérez-Arellano, Cristina Carranza Rodríguez, Miguel J. Martínez, Alicia Capón, Elias Cañas, Joaquin Salas-Coronas, Arkaitz Azcune Galparsoro, Jose Muñoz |
| Abstract |
We evaluated the risk for the Spanish Olympic Team acquiring Zika virus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, during 2016. We recruited 117 team members, and all tested negative for Zika virus. Lack of cases in this cohort supports the minimum risk estimates made before the Games. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| United States | 3 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 9% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 73% |
| Scientists | 4 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,199,977
of 24,771,057 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1,351
of 9,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,271
of 321,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#16
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,771,057 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 321,364 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.