↓ Skip to main content

Progress and Remaining Gaps in Estimating the Global Disease Burden of Influenza - Volume 24, Number 7—July 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
45 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Progress and Remaining Gaps in Estimating the Global Disease Burden of Influenza - Volume 24, Number 7—July 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
Published in
Emerging Infectious Diseases, July 2018
DOI 10.3201/eid2407.171270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph Bresee, Julia Fitzner, Harry Campbell, Cheryl Cohen, Vanessa Cozza, Jorge Jara, Anand Krishnan, Vernon Lee,

Abstract

Influenza has long been a global public health priority because of the threat of another global pandemic. Although data are available for the annual burden of seasonal influenza in many developed countries, fewer disease burden data are available for low-income and tropical countries. In recent years, however, the surveillance systems created as part of national pandemic preparedness efforts have produced substantial data on the epidemiology and impact of influenza in countries where data were sparse. These data are leading to greater interest in seasonal influenza, including implementation of vaccination programs. However, a lack of quality data on severe influenza, nonrespiratory outcomes, and high-risk groups, as well as a need for better mathematical models and economic evaluations, are some of the major gaps that remain. These gaps are the focus of multilateral research and surveillance efforts that will strengthen global efforts in influenza control in the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Student > Master 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 19 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 09 February 2020.
All research outputs
#666,629
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#825
of 9,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,122
of 332,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#13
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,461 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 91% 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 332,369 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 95% 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 well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.