| Title |
Why crowding matters in the time of COVID-19 pandemic? - a lesson from the carnival effect on the 2017/2018 influenza epidemic in the Netherlands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-020-09612-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qingui Chen, Myrthe M. A. Toorop, Mark G. J. de Boer, Frits R. Rosendaal, Willem M. Lijfering |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 5 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 03 March 2022.
All research outputs
#5,503,863
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,538
of 17,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,934
of 436,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#127
of 329 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,781 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 436,399 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 329 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 61% of its contemporaries.