↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the modes of tranmission model of new HIV infection and its use in prevention planning

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Understanding the modes of tranmission model of new HIV infection and its use in prevention planning
Published in
Bulletin of the World Health Organization, November 2012
DOI 10.2471/blt.12.102574
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelsey Case, Peter Ghys, Eleanor Gouws, Jeffery Eaton, Annick Borquez, John Stover, Paloma Cuchi, Laith Abu-Raddad, Geoffrey Garnett, Timothy Hallett

Abstract

The modes of transmission model has been widely used to help decision-makers target measures for preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The model estimates the number of new HIV infections that will be acquired over the ensuing year by individuals in identified risk groups in a given population using data on the size of the groups, the aggregate risk behaviour in each group, the current prevalence of HIV infection among the sexual or injecting drug partners of individuals in each group, and the probability of HIV transmission associated with different risk behaviours. The strength of the model is its simplicity, which enables data from a variety of sources to be synthesized, resulting in better characterization of HIV epidemics in some settings. However, concerns have been raised about the assumptions underlying the model structure, about limitations in the data available for deriving input parameters and about interpretation and communication of the model results. The aim of this review was to improve the use of the model by reassessing its paradigm, structure and data requirements. We identified key questions to be asked when conducting an analysis and when interpreting the model results and make recommendations for strengthening the model's application in the future.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 1%
Researcher 1 1%
Unknown 70 90%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Unknown 70 90%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 April 2021.
All research outputs
#3,215,493
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#92
of 599 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,849
of 203,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 599 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 203,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them