↓ Skip to main content

Early Decision Indicators for Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreaks in Non-Endemic Countries

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Early Decision Indicators for Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreaks in Non-Endemic Countries
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2016.00109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael G. Garner, Iain J. East, Mark A. Stevenson, Robert L. Sanson, Thomas G. Rawdon, Richard A. Bradhurst, Sharon E. Roche, Pham Van Ha, Tom Kompas

Abstract

Disease managers face many challenges when deciding on the most effective control strategy to manage an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD). Decisions have to be made under conditions of uncertainty and where the situation is continually evolving. In addition, resources for control are often limited. A modeling study was carried out to identify characteristics measurable during the early phase of a FMD outbreak that might be useful as predictors of the total number of infected places, outbreak duration, and the total area under control (AUC). The study involved two modeling platforms in two countries (Australia and New Zealand) and encompassed a large number of incursion scenarios. Linear regression, classification and regression tree, and boosted regression tree analyses were used to quantify the predictive value of a set of parameters on three outcome variables of interest: the total number of infected places, outbreak duration, and the total AUC. The number of infected premises (IPs), number of pending culls, AUC, estimated dissemination ratio, and cattle density around the index herd at days 7, 14, and 21 following first detection were associated with each of the outcome variables. Regression models for the size of the AUC had the highest predictive value (R(2) = 0.51-0.9) followed by the number of IPs (R(2) = 0.3-0.75) and outbreak duration (R(2) = 0.28-0.57). Predictability improved at later time points in the outbreak. Predictive regression models using various cut-points at day 14 to define small and large outbreaks had positive predictive values of 0.85-0.98 and negative predictive values of 0.52-0.91, with 79-97% of outbreaks correctly classified. On the strict assumption that each of the simulation models used in this study provide a realistic indication of the spread of FMD in animal populations. Our conclusion is that relatively simple metrics available early in a control program can be used to indicate the likely magnitude of an FMD outbreak under Australian and New Zealand conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Student > Master 8 22%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Professor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 24%
Environmental Science 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,161,227
of 23,317,888 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#2,778
of 6,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,345
of 418,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#18
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,317,888 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 418,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.