↓ Skip to main content

The changing epidemiology of Japanese encephalitis and New data: the implications for New recommendations for Japanese encephalitis vaccine

Overview of attention for article published in Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 143)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
89 news outlets
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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 changing epidemiology of Japanese encephalitis and New data: the implications for New recommendations for Japanese encephalitis vaccine
Published in
Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40794-017-0057-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bradley Connor, William B. Bunn

Abstract

The epidemiology of Japanese Encephalitis and risk to the traveler has changed and continues to evolve. The spread of Japanese Encephalitis virus into new environments, changes in agricultural practice and animal vectors, climate change, peri-urban growth, changes in international travel to Asia, personal risk factors, mosquito vector free transmission, interactions with other flaviviruses and better information on infections without encephalitis and other factors make Japanese Encephalitis an underappreciated risk. There has also been a change in the incidence of Japanese Encephalitis cases that questions the current travel duration and geographic based recommendations. A safe, effective vaccine (Ixiaro) that may be administered in a short course regimen is now available in the United States without the risks of the previous vaccine. However, the vaccine is significantly underutilized. These changes in the epidemiology and new data on the risks of the Japanese Encephalitis virus require a review of the practice guidelines and expert recommendations that do not reflect the current state of knowledge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 32 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 36 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 699. 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 15 March 2022.
All research outputs
#27,465
of 24,366,830 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines
#1
of 143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#543
of 320,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,366,830 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 320,985 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 99% 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