↓ Skip to main content

Fear factor: The unseen perils of the Ebola outbreak

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, August 2016
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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fear factor: The unseen perils of the Ebola outbreak
Published in
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, August 2016
DOI 10.1080/00963402.2016.1216515
Pubmed ID
Authors

James M. Shultz, Benjamin M. Althouse, Florence Baingana, Janice L. Cooper, Maria Espinola, M. Claire Greene, Zelde Espinel, Clyde B. McCoy, Laurie Mazurik, Andreas Rechkemmer

Abstract

As illustrated powerfully by the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak in western Africa, infectious diseases create fear and psychological reactions. Frequently, fear transforms into action - or inaction - and manifests as "fear-related behaviors" capable of amplifying the spread of disease, impeding lifesaving medical care for Ebola-infected persons and patients with other serious medical conditions, increasing psychological distress and disorder, and exacerbating social problems. And as the case of the US micro-outbreak shows, fear of an infectious-disease threat can spread explosively even when an epidemic has little chance of materializing. Authorities must take these realities into account if they hope to reduce the deadly effects of fear during future outbreaks.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 26%
Psychology 4 13%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 03 May 2020.
All research outputs
#663,448
of 15,833,692 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
#151
of 819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,236
of 267,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,833,692 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 819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 267,123 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.