↓ Skip to main content

Faster Detection of Poliomyelitis Outbreaks to Support Polio Eradication

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Faster Detection of Poliomyelitis Outbreaks to Support Polio Eradication
Published in
Emerging Infectious Diseases, March 2016
DOI 10.3201/eid2203.151394
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isobel M. Blake, Paul Chenoweth, Hiro Okayasu, Christl A. Donnelly, R. Bruce Aylward, Nicholas C. Grassly, I. M. Blake et al.

Abstract

As the global eradication of poliomyelitis approaches the final stages, prompt detection of new outbreaks is critical to enable a fast and effective outbreak response. Surveillance relies on reporting of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) cases and laboratory confirmation through isolation of poliovirus from stool. However, delayed sample collection and testing can delay outbreak detection. We investigated whether weekly testing for clusters of AFP by location and time, using the Kulldorff scan statistic, could provide an early warning for outbreaks in 20 countries. A mixed-effects regression model was used to predict background rates of nonpolio AFP at the district level. In Tajikistan and Congo, testing for AFP clusters would have resulted in an outbreak warning 39 and 11 days, respectively, before official confirmation of large outbreaks. This method has relatively high specificity and could be integrated into the current polio information system to support rapid outbreak response activities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 29%
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 8 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 2016.
All research outputs
#844,248
of 8,606,703 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1,071
of 5,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,096
of 290,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#45
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,606,703 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 290,663 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 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 66% of its contemporaries.