↓ Skip to main content

The 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic

Overview of attention for article published in Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
The 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic
Published in
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00103-012-1582-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

M.A.B. van der Sande, A. Jacobi, A. Meijer, J. Wallinga, W. van der Hoek, M. van der Lubben

Abstract

Prior to 2009, The Netherlands had prepared itself extensively for a potential pandemic. Multidisciplinary guidelines had been drafted to control transmission and limit adverse outcomes for both a phase of early incidental introduction and for a phase with widespread transmission. The Ministry of Health had ensured a supply and distribution schedule for antivirals and negotiated a contract for vaccine purchases. During the pandemic, existing surveillance was expanded, the established infectious disease response structure was activated, and the previously prepared protocols for communication, diagnostics, use of antivirals, and vaccination implementation were operationalized and implemented. When the pandemic turned out to be less severe than many had anticipated, risk communication and rapid modification of guidelines and communication became a major challenge. Antivirals and pandemic vaccines were reserved for those at high risk for severe outcomes only. Overall, the impact of the pandemic was comparable to the impact of an average seasonal influenza epidemic, but with a shift in (severe) outcomes from the very young and elderly toward young adults. Established prepared protocols enabled timely coordinated responses. In preparing for the worst, sufficient attention must be given to preparing for a mild scenario as well.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 17%
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Professor 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 September 2014.
All research outputs
#5,964,048
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#262
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,296
of 280,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 280,136 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.