↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study

Overview of attention for article published in Lancet Infectious Diseases, October 2020
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 (#9 of 4,417)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
167 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2444 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
379 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study
Published in
Lancet Infectious Diseases, October 2020
DOI 10.1016/s1473-3099(20)30457-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam J Kucharski, Petra Klepac, Andrew J K Conlan, Stephen M Kissler, Maria L Tang, Hannah Fry, Julia R Gog, W John Edmunds, Jon C Emery, Graham Medley, James D Munday, Timothy W Russell, Quentin J Leclerc, Charlie Diamond, Simon R Procter, Amy Gimma, Fiona Yueqian Sun, Hamish P Gibbs, Alicia Rosello, Kevin van Zandvoort, Stéphane Hué, Sophie R Meakin, Arminder K Deol, Gwen Knight, Thibaut Jombart, Anna M Foss, Nikos I Bosse, Katherine E Atkins, Billy J Quilty, Rachel Lowe, Kiesha Prem, Stefan Flasche, Carl A B Pearson, Rein M G J Houben, Emily S Nightingale, Akira Endo, Damien C Tully, Yang Liu, Julian Villabona-Arenas, Kathleen O'Reilly, Sebastian Funk, Rosalind M Eggo, Mark Jit, Eleanor M Rees, Joel Hellewell, Samuel Clifford, Christopher I Jarvis, Sam Abbott, Megan Auzenbergs, Nicholas G Davies, David Simons

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,444 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 379 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 379 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 68 18%
Student > Master 55 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 12%
Student > Bachelor 38 10%
Other 31 8%
Other 89 23%
Unknown 54 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 92 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 6%
Social Sciences 19 5%
Computer Science 18 5%
Other 114 30%
Unknown 87 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2853. 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 25 October 2020.
All research outputs
#852
of 16,094,294 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#9
of 4,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109
of 248,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#3
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,094,294 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 4,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 54.2. 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 248,090 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 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.