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 |
Examples of applied public health through the work of the Epidemic Intelligence Service officers at CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health: 2006–2015
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Public Health Reviews, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40985-017-0051-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yulia I. Carroll, Fauzia A. Rashid, Henry Falk, Meredith M. Howley |
| Abstract |
The Epidemic Intelligence Service officers (EISOs) at the National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH)/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) respond to public health outbreaks, assist public health surveillance, and recommend public health actions. We summarize the breadth of work done by EISOs assigned to NCEH/ATSDR during 2006-2015. We used the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify articles authored by the EISOs, number and types of epidemiologic assistance field investigations (Epi-Aids), and interviewed NCEH/ATSDR programs with EISO assignees. The largest number of NCEH/ATSDR EISO publications (n = 61) and Epi-Aids (n = 110) related to toxic chemicals (23 and 37, respectively), followed by natural disasters and those caused by humans (19 and 25, respectively), extreme temperature-related illness (9), and chronic diseases (8). The investigations raised awareness, identified risk factors and public health needs, and introduced better prevention and protection measures for human health. Through field investigations and other technical assistance, NCEH/ATSDR provided leadership and staff scientists to assist in the field, as well as knowledge transfer to local, state, territorial, and international health departments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 18% |
| Researcher | 8 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,543,494
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reviews
#195
of 259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,538
of 427,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reviews
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 427,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.