↓ Skip to main content

Global avian influenza outbreaks 2010–2016: a systematic review of their distribution, avian species and virus subtype

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 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
Global avian influenza outbreaks 2010–2016: a systematic review of their distribution, avian species and virus subtype
Published in
Systematic Reviews, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0691-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ioanna P. Chatziprodromidou, Malamatenia Arvanitidou, Javier Guitian, Thomas Apostolou, George Vantarakis, Apostolos Vantarakis

Abstract

We conducted a systematic review to investigate avian influenza outbreaks and to explore their distribution, upon avian influenza subtype, country, avian species and other relating details as no comprehensive epidemiological analysis of global avian influenza outbreaks from 2010 to 2016 exists. Data was collated from four databases (Scopus, Web of Science Core Correlation, PubMed and SpringerLink electronic journal) and a global electronic reporting system (ProMED mail), using PRISMA and ORION systematic approaches. One hundred seventy three avian influenza virus outbreaks were identified and included in this review, alongside 198 ProMED mail reports. Our research identified that the majority of the reported outbreaks occurred in 2016 (22.2%). These outbreaks were located in China (13.6%) and referred to commercial poultry farms (56.1%). The most common subtype reported in these outbreaks was H5N1 (38.2%), while almost 82.5% of the subtypes were highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses. There were differences noticed between ProMED mail and the scientific literature screened. Avian influenza virus has been proved to be able to contaminate all types of avian species, including commercial poultry farms, wild birds, backyard domestic animals, live poultry, game birds and mixed poultry. The study focused on wet markets, slaughterhouses, wild habitats, zoos and natural parks, in both developed and developing countries. The impact of avian influenza virus seems disproportionate and could potentially burden the already existing disparities in the public health domain. Therefore, a collaboration between all the involved health sectors is considered to be more than necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 186 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 15%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 24 13%
Unknown 69 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 22 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 6%
Other 30 16%
Unknown 73 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 11 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,540,792
of 25,494,370 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#422
of 2,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,738
of 450,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#21
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,494,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 450,963 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 55 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 63% of its contemporaries.