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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Characterizing the interface between wild ducks and poultry to evaluate the potential of transmission of avian pathogens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Health Geographics, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1476-072x-10-60 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julien Cappelle, Nicolas Gaidet, Samuel A Iverson, John Y Takekawa, Scott H Newman, Bouba Fofana, Marius Gilbert |
| Abstract |
Characterizing the interface between wild and domestic animal populations is increasingly recognized as essential in the context of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) that are transmitted by wildlife. More specifically, the spatial and temporal distribution of contact rates between wild and domestic hosts is a key parameter for modeling EIDs transmission dynamics. We integrated satellite telemetry, remote sensing and ground-based surveys to evaluate the spatio-temporal dynamics of indirect contacts between wild and domestic birds to estimate the risk that avian pathogens such as avian influenza and Newcastle viruses will be transmitted between wildlife to poultry. We monitored comb ducks (Sarkidiornis melanotos melanotos) with satellite transmitters for seven months in an extensive Afro-tropical wetland (the Inner Niger Delta) in Mali and characterise the spatial distribution of backyard poultry in villages. We modelled the spatial distribution of wild ducks using 250-meter spatial resolution and 8-days temporal resolution remotely-sensed environmental indicators based on a Maxent niche modelling method. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 23% |
| Researcher | 21 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 36% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 14 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 9 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 2013.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#293
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,862
of 152,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 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 152,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.