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 |
Uncertainties associated with assessing the public health risk from Legionella
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00501 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harriet Whiley, Alexandra Keegan, Howard Fallowfield, Kirstin Ross |
| Abstract |
Legionella is an opportunistic pathogen of public health concern. Current regulatory and management guidelines for the control of this organism are informed by risk assessments. However, there are many unanswered questions and uncertainties regarding Legionella epidemiology, strain infectivity, infectious dose, and detection methods. This review follows the EnHealth Risk Assessment Framework, to examine the current information available regarding Legionella risk and discuss the uncertainties and assumptions. This review can be used as a tool for understanding the uncertainties associated with Legionella risk assessment. It also serves to highlight the areas of Legionella research that require future focus. Improvement of these uncertainties will provide information to enhance risk management practices for Legionella, potentially improving public health protection and reducing the economic costs by streamlining current management practices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 19% |
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 24% |
| Environmental Science | 10 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 10 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 10% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,195,838
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#6,085
of 24,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,434
of 305,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#23
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 305,303 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 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 73% of its contemporaries.