↓ Skip to main content

Bluetongue, Schmallenberg - what is next? Culicoides-borne viral diseases in the 21stCentury

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Bluetongue, Schmallenberg - what is next? Culicoides-borne viral diseases in the 21stCentury
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, March 2014
DOI 10.1186/1746-6148-10-77
Pubmed ID
Authors

Constantianus JM Koenraadt, Thomas Balenghien, Simon Carpenter, Els Ducheyne, Armin RW Elbers, Mark Fife, Claire Garros, Adolfo Ibáñez-Justicia, Helge Kampen, Richard JM Kormelink, Bertrand Losson, Wim HM van der Poel, Nick De Regge, Piet A van Rijn, Christopher Sanders, Francis Schaffner, Marianne M Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, Willem Takken, Doreen Werner, Frederik Seelig

Abstract

In the past decade, two pathogens transmitted by Culicoides biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), bluetongue virus and Schmallenberg virus, have caused serious economic losses to the European livestock industry, most notably affecting sheep and cattle. These outbreaks of arboviral disease have highlighted large knowledge gaps on the biology and ecology of indigenous Culicoides species. With these research gaps in mind, and as a means of assessing what potential disease outbreaks to expect in the future, an international workshop was held in May 2013 at Wageningen University, The Netherlands. It brought together research groups from Belgium, France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom and The Netherlands, with diverse backgrounds in vector ecology, epidemiology, entomology, virology, animal health, modelling, and genetics. Here, we report on the key findings of this workshop.

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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 105 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Master 13 12%
Other 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 34%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 26 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 22 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 May 2014.
All research outputs
#15,998,913
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,189
of 3,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,094
of 239,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#16
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,301 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 239,441 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 66% of its contemporaries.