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 |
Optimal specimen collection and transport methods for the detection of avian influenza virus and Newcastle disease virus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-6148-9-35 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erica Spackman, Janice C Pedersen, Enid T McKinley, Jack Gelb |
| Abstract |
Active and passive surveillance for avian influenza virus (AIV) and Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is widespread in commercial poultry worldwide, therefore optimization of sample collection and transport would be valuable to achieve the best sensitivity and specificity possible, and to develop the most accurate and efficient testing programs. A H7N2 low pathogenicity (LP) AIV strain was selected and used as an indicator virus because it is present in lower concentrations in swabbings and thus requires greater sensitivity for detection compared to highly pathogenic (HP) AIV. For similar reasons a mesogenic strain of NDV was selected. Using oro-pharyngeal and cloacal swabs collected from chickens experimentally exposed to the viruses we evaluated the effects of numerous aspects of sample collection and transport: 1) swab construction material (flocked nylon, non-flocked Dacron, or urethane foam), 2) transport media (brain heart infusion broth [BHI] or phosphate buffered saline [PBS]), 3) media volume (2 ml or 3.5 ml), 4) transporting the swab wet in the vial or removing the swab prior to transport, or transporting the swab dry with no media, and 5) single swabs versus pooling 5 or 11 swabs per vial. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Bangladesh | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 105 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 19% |
| Researcher | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 14% |
| Unknown | 22 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 29% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 20 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 24 | 22% |
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 01 September 2022.
All research outputs
#6,415,030
of 23,213,531 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#465
of 3,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,508
of 194,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#5
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,213,531 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 3,090 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 194,069 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.