↓ Skip to main content

Public health for the people: participatory infectious disease surveillance in the digital age

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Themes in Epidemiology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 129)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Public health for the people: participatory infectious disease surveillance in the digital age
Published in
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1742-7622-11-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oktawia P Wójcik, John S Brownstein, Rumi Chunara, Michael A Johansson

Abstract

The 21(st) century has seen the rise of Internet-based participatory surveillance systems for infectious diseases. These systems capture voluntarily submitted symptom data from the general public and can aggregate and communicate that data in near real-time. We reviewed participatory surveillance systems currently running in 13 different countries. These systems have a growing evidence base showing a high degree of accuracy and increased sensitivity and timeliness relative to traditional healthcare-based systems. They have also proven useful for assessing risk factors, vaccine effectiveness, and patterns of healthcare utilization while being less expensive, more flexible, and more scalable than traditional systems. Nonetheless, they present important challenges including biases associated with the population that chooses to participate, difficulty in adjusting for confounders, and limited specificity because of reliance only on syndromic definitions of disease limits. Overall, participatory disease surveillance data provides unique disease information that is not available through traditional surveillance sources.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Saudi Arabia 1 <1%
Unknown 122 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 23%
Student > Master 27 21%
Researcher 24 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 11 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 30%
Computer Science 15 12%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 29 23%
Unknown 15 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 28 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,128,269
of 16,650,712 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Themes in Epidemiology
#14
of 129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,432
of 191,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Themes in Epidemiology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,650,712 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 191,563 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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