| Title |
Risk Communication and Ebola-Specific Knowledge and Behavior during 2014–2015 Outbreak, Sierra Leone - Volume 24, Number 2—February 2018 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2402.171028 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maike Winters, Mohamed F. Jalloh, Paul Sengeh, Mohammad B. Jalloh, Lansana Conteh, Rebecca Bunnell, Wenshu Li, Zangin Zeebari, Helena Nordenstedt |
| Abstract |
We assessed the effect of information sources on Ebola-specific knowledge and behavior during the 2014-2015 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Sierra Leone. We pooled data from 4 population-based knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys (August, October, and December 2014 and July 2015), with a total of 10,604 respondents. We created composite variables for exposures (information sources: electronic, print, new media, government, community) and outcomes (knowledge and misconceptions, protective and risk behavior) and tested associations by using logistic regression within multilevel modeling. Exposure to information sources was associated with higher knowledge and protective behaviors. However, apart from print media, exposure to information sources was also linked to misconceptions and risk behavior, but with weaker associations observed. Knowledge and protective behavior were associated with the outbreak level, most strongly after the peak, whereas risk behavior was seen at all levels of the outbreak. In future outbreaks, close attention should be paid to dissemination of information. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 States | 2 | 22% |
| Canada | 1 | 11% |
| Colombia | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 26% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 09 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,665,102
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1,860
of 9,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,683
of 448,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#26
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 448,350 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 91% 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 done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.