| Title |
Comparison of incubation period distribution of human infections with MERS-CoV in South Korea and Saudi Arabia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep35839 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Victor Virlogeux, Vicky J. Fang, Minah Park, Joseph T. Wu, Benjamin J. Cowling |
| Abstract |
The incubation period is an important epidemiologic distribution, it is often incorporated in case definitions, used to determine appropriate quarantine periods, and is an input to mathematical modeling studies. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS) is an emerging infectious disease in the Arabian Peninsula. There was a large outbreak of MERS in South Korea in 2015. We examined the incubation period distribution of MERS coronavirus infection for cases in South Korea and in Saudi Arabia. Using parametric and nonparametric methods, we estimated a mean incubation period of 6.9 days (95% credibility interval: 6.3-7.5) for cases in South Korea and 5.0 days (95% credibility interval: 4.0-6.6) among cases in Saudi Arabia. In a log-linear regression model, the mean incubation period was 1.42 times longer (95% credibility interval: 1.18-1.71) among cases in South Korea compared to Saudi Arabia. The variation that we identified in the incubation period distribution between locations could be associated with differences in ascertainment or reporting of exposure dates and illness onset dates, differences in the source or mode of infection, or environmental differences. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 25 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Unknown | 31 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#80,906
of 127,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,405
of 315,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#2,380
of 3,623 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 315,760 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,623 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.