↓ Skip to main content

Factors Influencing Mitigation of Risk of Waterborne Disease in Vietnam Among Small Scale Integrated Livestock Farmers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Factors Influencing Mitigation of Risk of Waterborne Disease in Vietnam Among Small Scale Integrated Livestock Farmers
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2018.00154
Pubmed ID
Authors

David C. Hall, Quynh B. Le

Abstract

The integrated livestock, crops, and fish (VAC) model of integrated small scale agriculture has been important to economic and ecological sustainability in Vietnam for many centuries. Recently, emerging waterborne diseases including avian influenza as well as the potential for zoonotic disease arising from small scale farms have jeopardized the VAC model. In order to promote mitigation of the risk of waterborne and other diseases in the VAC system, there needs to be recognition of the significant predictors of such behavior, particularly with respect to water sources including well and rain water. We report primarily quantitative results of research generated from 300 farms in each of North and South Vietnam that indicate the small scale farmers who are more likely to engage in mitigation of waterborne disease are those who raise pigs, perceive themselves to be more at risk of HPAI infection from well water, report they are good livestock managers, value the advice of health care workers, and where a female household member is the decision maker for family health. These results bear importance to water and health policy formulators in rural Vietnam. (JEL I130, I180, O130, Q180, Q570). JEL CLASSIFICATIONS: I130: Health and economic developmentI180: Public healthO130: Economic Development: Agriculture; EnvironmentQ180: Agricultural policy; Food policyQ570: Ecological economics: biodiversity conservation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 28 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 20%
Environmental Science 10 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 32 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,641,800
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#4,208
of 6,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,186
of 326,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#83
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 326,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.