↓ Skip to main content

Impact of the 2012 extreme drought conditions on private well owners in the United States, a qualitative analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Impact of the 2012 extreme drought conditions on private well owners in the United States, a qualitative analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3039-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Murti, Ellen Yard, Rachel Kramer, Dirk Haselow, Mike Mettler, Rocky McElvany, Colleen Martin

Abstract

Extreme hot and dry weather during summer 2012 resulted in some of the most devastating drought conditions in the last half-century in the United States (U.S.). While public drinking water systems have contingency plans and access to alternative resources to maintain supply for their customers during drought, little is known about the impacts of drought on private well owners, who are responsible for maintaining their own water supply. The purpose of this investigation was to explore the public health impacts of the 2012 drought on private well owners' water quality and quantity, identify their needs for planning and preparing for drought, and to explore their knowledge, attitudes, and well maintenance behaviors during drought. In the spring of 2013, we conducted six focus group discussions with private well owners in Arkansas, Indiana, and Oklahoma. There were a total of 41 participants, two-thirds of whom were men aged 55 years or older. While participants agreed that 2012 was the worst drought in memory, few experienced direct impacts on their water quantity or quality. However, all groups had heard of areas or individuals whose wells had run dry. Participants conserved water by reducing their indoor and outdoor consumption, but they had few suggestions on additional ways to conserve, and they raised concerns about limiting water use too much. Participants wanted information on how to test their well and any water quality issues in their area. This investigation identified information needs regarding drought preparedness and well management for well owners.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 16 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Engineering 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 20 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 June 2016.
All research outputs
#13,396,446
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,500
of 14,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,036
of 334,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#135
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 334,086 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.