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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Development of a Pediatric Ebola Predictive Score, Sierra Leone - Volume 24, Number 2—February 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2402.171018 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felicity Fitzgerald, Kevin Wing, Asad Naveed, Musa Gbessay, J.C.G. Ross, Francesco Checchi, Daniel Youkee, Mohamed Boie Jalloh, David E. Baion, Ayeshatu Mustapha, Hawanatu Jah, Sandra Lako, Shefali Oza, Sabah Boufkhed, Reynold Feury, Julia Bielicki, Elizabeth Williamson, Diana M. Gibb, Nigel Klein, Foday Sahr, Shunmay Yeung |
| Abstract |
We compared children who were positive for Ebola virus disease (EVD) with those who were negative to derive a pediatric EVD predictor (PEP) score. We collected data on all children <13 years of age admitted to 11 Ebola holding units in Sierra Leone during August 2014-March 2015 and performed multivariable logistic regression. Among 1,054 children, 309 (29%) were EVD positive and 697 (66%) EVD negative, with 48 (5%) missing. Contact history, conjunctivitis, and age were the strongest positive predictors for EVD. The PEP score had an area under receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.80. A PEP score of 7/10 was 92% specific and 44% sensitive; 3/10 was 30% specific, 94% sensitive. The PEP score could correctly classify 79%-90% of children and could be used to facilitate triage into risk categories, depending on the sensitivity or specificity required. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 40% |
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 23% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 30% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 February 2018.
All research outputs
#4,934,727
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#4,037
of 9,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,851
of 449,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#57
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 449,384 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 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 54% of its contemporaries.