↓ Skip to main content

The inevitable colonisation of Singapore by Zika virus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, November 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 (85th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
The inevitable colonisation of Singapore by Zika virus
Published in
BMC Medicine, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12916-016-0737-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dale Fisher, Jeffery Cutter

Abstract

Singapore is endemic for Dengue virus, with approximately 10,000 to 20,000 annual cases reported in recent years. In 2012, Chikungunya was introduced, although the numbers of cases reported is much fewer. The current Zika virus pandemic originating in Brazil represents a threat to all regions with Aedes mosquitoes, particularly those well connected by travellers. In this respect, it was felt inevitable that Singapore would eventually realise its third endemic flavivirus. In late August 2016, a primary care practitioner observed a cluster of geographically linked patients attending with fever and rash. This resulted in the first identification of locally transmitted Zika in Singapore on August 27, 2016. This prompted a robust response in an attempt to stop further spread, which continued for approximately 10 days until a large number of laboratory-confirmed cases were found as a result of active case finding. Surprisingly, the strain was later identified to be of Asian lineage and distinct from that originating in the Americas, prompting speculation over the epidemiology of this under recognised virus in Asia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 70 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%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 24%
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 11%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 December 2018.
All research outputs
#2,881,482
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,723
of 3,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,725
of 414,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#40
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 414,929 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.