↓ Skip to main content

Pet husbandry and infection control practices related to zoonotic disease risks in Ontario, Canada

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Pet husbandry and infection control practices related to zoonotic disease risks in Ontario, Canada
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-520
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason W Stull, Andrew S Peregrine, Jan M Sargeant, J Scott Weese

Abstract

Many human infections are transmitted through contact with animals (zoonoses), including household pets. Despite this concern, there is limited knowledge of the public's pet husbandry and infection control practices. The objective of this study was to characterize zoonotic disease related-husbandry and infection preventive practices in pet-owning households in Ontario, Canada. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to individuals at two multi-physician clinics in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada during 2010. One adult from each household was invited to participate in the study. Four hundred one pet-owners completed the questionnaire. Households reported ownership of dogs (68%), cats (48%), fish (13%), exotic mammals (7%), such as hamsters, and reptiles and birds (each 6%). Across all species, individuals at higher risk of infections (i.e. < 5 yrs, ≥ 65 yrs, immunocompromised) were often (46-57%) present in households. Children < 16 yrs of age had close pet contact, as households reported dogs (13%) and cats (30%) usually slept in a child's bed and dogs often licked a child's face (24%). Household husbandry practices that increase zoonotic disease risk were frequently identified; some fed high-risk foods (i.e. raw eggs, raw meat, or raw animal product treats) to their dogs (28%) or cats (3%); 14% of reptile-owning households allowed the pet to roam through the kitchen or washed it in the kitchen sink. Reported hand washing by children was high for all species (> 76% washed hands sometimes or greater after touching the pet, its feces, or housing), although fewer reported children always washed their hands (3-57%; by species). With a few exceptions, practices were not associated with the presence of higher risk members in the household or recall of having previously received zoonotic disease education. The results suggest there is a need for education on zoonotic disease prevention practices for pet-owning households with individuals at higher risk of infection and those with high-risk species (e.g., reptiles). Further research is needed to determine the role of education in altering higher risk pet practices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 126 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Researcher 10 8%
Professor 8 6%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 27 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 27 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 7%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 28 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 187. 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 23 September 2023.
All research outputs
#201,094
of 24,492,652 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#179
of 16,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,260
of 198,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 270 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,492,652 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 198,979 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 270 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.