| Title |
Changing Geographic Patterns and Risk Factors for Avian Influenza A(H7N9) Infections in Humans, China - Volume 24, Number 1—January 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2401.171393 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean Artois, Hui Jiang, Xiling Wang, Ying Qin, Morgan Pearcy, Shengjie Lai, Yujing Shi, Juanjuan Zhang, Zhibin Peng, Jiandong Zheng, Yangni He, Madhur S. Dhingra, Sophie von Dobschuetz, Fusheng Guo, Vincent Martin, Wantanee Kalpravidh, Filip Claes, Timothy Robinson, Simon I. Hay, Xiangming Xiao, Luzhao Feng, Marius Gilbert, Hongjie Yu |
| Abstract |
The fifth epidemic wave of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in China during 2016-2017 demonstrated a geographic range expansion and caused more human cases than any previous wave. The factors that may explain the recent range expansion and surge in incidence remain unknown. We investigated the effect of anthropogenic, poultry, and wetland variables on all epidemic waves. Poultry predictor variables became much more important in the last 2 epidemic waves than they were previously, supporting the assumption of much wider H7N9 transmission in the chicken reservoir. We show that the future range expansion of H7N9 to northern China may increase the risk of H7N9 epidemic peaks coinciding in time and space with those of seasonal influenza, leading to a higher risk of reassortments than before, although the risk is still low so far. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 | 4 | 15% |
| Belgium | 3 | 12% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 8% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Somalia | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 12% |
| Scientists | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 10 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,642,524
of 25,413,176 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1,858
of 9,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,011
of 449,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#33
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,413,176 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 449,711 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.