↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Nonpharmaceutical Interventions for Pandemic Influenza, National and Community Measures - Volume 12, Number 1—January 2006 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
381 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
287 Mendeley
Title
Nonpharmaceutical Interventions for Pandemic Influenza, National and Community Measures - Volume 12, Number 1—January 2006 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
Published in
Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2012
DOI 10.3201/eid1201.051371
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Bell, Angus Nicoll, Keiji Fukuda, Peter Horby, Arnold Monto, Frederick Hayden, Clare Wylks, Lance Sanders, Jonathan van Tam

Abstract

The World Health Organization's recommended pandemic influenza interventions, based on limited data, vary by transmission pattern, pandemic phase, and illness severity and extent. In the pandemic alert period, recommendations include isolation of patients and quarantine of contacts, accompanied by antiviral therapy. During the pandemic period, the focus shifts to delaying spread and reducing effects through population-based measures. Ill persons should remain home when they first become symptomatic, but forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical. If the pandemic is severe, social distancing measures such as school closures should be considered. Nonessential domestic travel to affected areas should be deferred. Hand and respiratory hygiene should be routine; mask use should be based on setting and risk, and contaminated household surfaces should be disinfected. Additional research and field assessments during pandemics are essential to update recommendations. Legal authority and procedures for implementing interventions should be understood in advance and should respect cultural differences and human rights.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 202 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 287 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Australia 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 274 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 18%
Student > Master 41 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 20 7%
Other 65 23%
Unknown 47 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 22%
Social Sciences 27 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 4%
Other 73 25%
Unknown 66 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 719. 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 27 April 2024.
All research outputs
#28,882
of 25,808,886 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#100
of 9,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87
of 252,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,808,886 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,808 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 252,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.