↓ Skip to main content

Design and descriptive epidemiology of the Infectious Diseases of East African Livestock (IDEAL) project, a longitudinal calf cohort study in western Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Design and descriptive epidemiology of the Infectious Diseases of East African Livestock (IDEAL) project, a longitudinal calf cohort study in western Kenya
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1746-6148-9-171
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barend Mark de Clare Bronsvoort, Samuel Mwangi Thumbi, Elizabeth Jane Poole, Henry Kiara, Olga Tosas Auguet, Ian Graham Handel, Amy Jennings, Ilana Conradie, Mary Ndila Mbole-Kariuki, Philip G Toye, Olivier Hanotte, JAW Coetzer, Mark EJ Woolhouse

Abstract

There is a widely recognised lack of baseline epidemiological data on the dynamics and impacts of infectious cattle diseases in east Africa. The Infectious Diseases of East African Livestock (IDEAL) project is an epidemiological study of cattle health in western Kenya with the aim of providing baseline epidemiological data, investigating the impact of different infections on key responses such as growth, mortality and morbidity, the additive and/or multiplicative effects of co-infections, and the influence of management and genetic factors.A longitudinal cohort study of newborn calves was conducted in western Kenya between 2007-2009. Calves were randomly selected from all those reported in a 2 stage clustered sampling strategy. Calves were recruited between 3 and 7 days old. A team of veterinarians and animal health assistants carried out 5-weekly, clinical and postmortem visits. Blood and tissue samples were collected in association with all visits and screened using a range of laboratory based diagnostic methods for over 100 different pathogens or infectious exposures.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Norway 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Unknown 129 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Master 25 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 29%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 17 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 10%
Unspecified 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 28 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#13,041,967
of 17,015,490 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,344
of 2,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,239
of 168,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#21
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,015,490 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,498 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 168,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.