↓ Skip to main content

Exposure to human-associated fecal indicators and self-reported illness among swimmers at recreational beaches: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Exposure to human-associated fecal indicators and self-reported illness among swimmers at recreational beaches: a cohort study
Published in
Environmental Health, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12940-017-0308-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie D. Napier, Richard Haugland, Charles Poole, Alfred P. Dufour, Jill R. Stewart, David J. Weber, Manju Varma, Jennifer S. Lavender, Timothy J. Wade

Abstract

Fecal indicator bacteria used to assess illness risks in recreational waters (e.g., Escherichia coli, Enterococci) cannot discriminate among pollution sources. To address this limitation, human-associated Bacteroides markers have been proposed, but the risk of illness associated with the presence of these markers in recreational waters is unclear. Our objective was to estimate associations between human-associated Bacteroides markers in water and self-reported illness among swimmers at 6 U.S. beaches spanning 2003-2007. We used data from a prospectively-enrolled cohort of 12,060 swimmers surveyed about beach activities and water exposure on the day of their beach visit. Ten to twelve days later, participants reported gastroinestinal, diarrheal, and respiratory illnesses experienced since the visit. Daily water samples were analyzed for the presence of human-associated Bacteroides genetic markers: HF183, BsteriF1, BuniF2, HumM2. We used model-based standardization to estimate risk differences (RD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed whether the presence of Bacteroides markers were modifiers of the association between general Enterococcus and illness among swimmers using interaction contrast. Overall we observed inconsistent associations between the presence of Bacteroides markers and illness. There was a pattern of increased risks of gastrointestinal (RD = 1.9%; 95% CI: 0.1%, 3.7%), diarrheal (RD = 1.3%; 95% CI: -0.2%, 2.7%), and respiratory illnesses (RD = 1.1%; 95% CI: -0.2%, 2.5%) associated with BsteriF1. There was no evidence that Bacteroides markers acted as modifiers of Enterococcus and illness. Patterns were similar when stratified by water matrix. Quantitative measures of fecal pollution using Bacteroides, rather than presence-absence indicators, may be necessary to accurately assess human risk specific to the presence of human fecal pollution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 18 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Engineering 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#7,100,407
of 25,130,202 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#829
of 1,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,080
of 328,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#16
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,130,202 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,587 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 328,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.