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 |
Potential corridors and barriers for plague spread in central Asia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Health Geographics, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1476-072x-12-49 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liesbeth I Wilschut, Elisabeth A Addink, Hans Heesterbeek, Lise Heier, Anne Laudisoit, Mike Begon, Stephen Davis, Vladimir M Dubyanskiy, Leonid A Burdelov, Steven M de Jong |
| Abstract |
Plague (Yersinia pestis infection) is a vector-borne disease which caused millions of human deaths in the Middle Ages. The hosts of plague are mostly rodents, and the disease is spread by the fleas that feed on them. Currently, the disease still circulates amongst sylvatic rodent populations all over the world, including great gerbil (Rhombomys opimus) populations in Central Asia. Great gerbils are social desert rodents that live in family groups in burrows, which are visible on satellite images. In great gerbil populations an abundance threshold exists, above which plague can spread causing epizootics. The spatial distribution of the host species is thought to influence the plague dynamics, such as the direction of plague spread, however no detailed analysis exists on the possible functional or structural corridors and barriers that are present in this population and landscape. This study aims to fill that gap. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 States | 3 | 4% |
| Finland | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 6% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 21% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,048,214
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#97
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,443
of 225,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 225,925 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.