↓ Skip to main content

Understanding human – bat interactions in NSW, Australia: improving risk communication for prevention of Australian bat lyssavirus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Understanding human – bat interactions in NSW, Australia: improving risk communication for prevention of Australian bat lyssavirus
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1746-6148-10-144
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma K Quinn, Peter D Massey, Keren Cox-Witton, Beverley J Paterson, Keith Eastwood, David N Durrheim

Abstract

Australian bat lyssavirus (ABLV) infects a number of flying fox and insectivorous bats species in Australia. Human infection with ABLV is inevitably fatal unless prior vaccination and/or post-exposure treatment (PET) is given. Despite ongoing public health messaging about the risks associated with bat contact, surveillance data have revealed a four-fold increase in the number of people receiving PET for bat exposure in NSW between 2007 and 2011. Our study aimed to better understand these human - bat interactions in order to identify additional risk communication messages that could lower the risk of potential ABLV exposure. All people aged 18 years or over whom received PET for non-occupation related potential ABLV exposure in the Hunter New England Local Health District of Australia between July 2011 and July 2013 were considered eligible for the study. Eligible participants were invited to a telephone interview to explore the circumstances of their bat contact. Interviews were then transcribed and thematically analysed by two independent investigators.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 15 25%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 July 2014.
All research outputs
#15,740,207
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,112
of 3,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,288
of 242,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#22
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,298 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 242,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.