| Title |
Role of Food Insecurity in Outbreak of Anthrax Infections among Humans and Hippopotamuses Living in a Game Reserve Area, Rural Zambia - Volume 23, Number 9—September 2017 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2309.161597 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark W. Lehman, Allen S. Craig, Constantine Malama, Muzala Kapina-Kany’anga, Philip Malenga, Fanny Munsaka, Sergio Muwowo, Sean Shadomy, Melissa A. Marx |
| Abstract |
In September 2011, a total of 511 human cases of anthrax (Bacillus anthracis) infection and 5 deaths were reported in a game management area in the district of Chama, Zambia, near where 85 hippopotamuses (Hippopotamus amphibious) had recently died of suspected anthrax. The human infections generally responded to antibiotics. To clarify transmission, we conducted a cross-sectional, interviewer-administered household survey in villages where human anthrax cases and hippopotamuses deaths were reported. Among 284 respondents, 84% ate hippopotamus meat before the outbreak. Eating, carrying, and preparing meat were associated with anthrax infection. Despite the risk, 23% of respondents reported they would eat meat from hippopotamuses found dead again because of food shortage (73%), lack of meat (12%), hunger (7%), and protein shortage (5%). Chronic food insecurity can lead to consumption of unsafe foods, leaving communities susceptible to zoonotic infection. Interagency cooperation is necessary to prevent outbreaks by addressing the root cause of exposure, such as food insecurity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 | 10 | 53% |
| Bolivia, Plurinational State of | 1 | 5% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 21% |
| Scientists | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 17 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 12% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 10 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 21% |
| Unknown | 22 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 351. 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 29 January 2020.
All research outputs
#88,219
of 24,677,985 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#205
of 9,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,054
of 321,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#3
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,677,985 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,555 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 97% 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 321,000 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 99% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.