Ross River virus in Melbourne, how did that happen?

aedesnotoscriptus

Health authorities in Victoria have been warning of mosquito-borne Ross River virus for much of the summer. The state is experiencing one of its worst outbreaks of the disease but cases have mostly been across inland regions. Now it’s hit Melbourne. How has this happened?

Ross River virus is the most commonly reported mosquito-borne disease in Australia. There are usually about 5,000 cases across Australia. However, in 2015 there was a major spike in activity with around 9,000 cases reported. It is a common misconception that the disease is only found in northern regions of Australia. I’m often told “I heard the disease is moving south from QLD?” That’s not the case.

The virus is just as much a natural part of the Australian environment as the mosquitoes and the wildlife that maintain transmission cycles.

While there are generally more cases in northern Australia, nowhere is safe. Some of the largest outbreaks have occurred in southern regions of Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and even Tasmania.

The virus is widespread but is generally associated with rural regions. A driving factor in determining the activity of Ross River virus is that more than just mosquitoes are involved in outbreaks. The virus is maintained in the environment in native wildlife, especially kangaroos and wallabies. Even when and where there are high numbers of mosquitoes, without wildlife, outbreak risk is low. This is the reason why any clusters of locally infected cases in metropolitan regions are typical in areas where there are wetlands, wildlife and mosquitoes occurring together. We’ve seen this on the urban fringe of Sydney and Perth in recent years.

The announcement of locally acquired cases in the suburbs of Frankston and Casey, in Melbourne’s south-east, has taken many by surprise. Should it have?

Victoria is no stranger to mosquitoes and outbreaks of mosquito-borne disease. There are mosquito surveillance and mosquito control programs in place in many regions and historically there have been major outbreaks of mosquito-borne disease. From freshwater flood plains of the inland to the tidally flooded estuarine wetlands of the coast, Victoria has diverse and often abundant mosquitoes. But cases in the metropolitan region are rare.

Victorian mosquitoes are not all bad but over a dozen different mosquito species can spread Ross River virus.

The region where these cases have been identified are in proximity to bushland and wetland areas. There is no doubt plenty of mosquitoes and suitable wildlife too. While this is the first time local transmission has been documented, that doesn’t mean the virus hasn’t circulated in the past, or even that cases may have occurred.

For individuals infected but only suffering mild symptoms, the illness can be easily discounted as nothing more than a mild case of the flu. Without appropriate blood tests, these cases never appear in official statistics. For this reason, many mosquito researchers believe that the number of notified cases across the country is just the tip of the iceberg with many milder infections going diagnosed.

But why in Melbourne now?

It is difficult to know for sure. The two most likely explanations are that either environmental conditions were ideal for mosquitoes and suitable populations of wildlife were present so that the virus was much more active in the local environment than previously. The second explanation is that the virus may have been introduced to the region by a traveller or movement of wildlife. In much the same way Zika virus made its way from SE Asia to South America in the last few years, mosquito-borne viruses move about in people and animals, much less so than mosquitoes themselves (but that isn’t impossible either).

Victoria (as well as inland NSW) is experiencing one of its largest outbreaks of Ross River virus on record following significant flooding of inland regions. With so much activity of the virus in the region, perhaps an infected bird or person travelling to the metropolitan region brought the virus with them. When bitten by local mosquitoes, the virus started circulated among local mosquitoes and wildlife.

Most people infected by Ross River virus are bitten by a mosquito that has previously fed on a kangaroo or wallaby.

Once it’s made its way to metropolitan regions, the virus can be spread from person to person by mosquitoes. Common backyard mosquitoes, especially Aedes notoscriptus, can transmit the virus but as these mosquitoes are not particularly abundant, don’t fly vary far and will just as likely bite animals as humans, they’re unlikely to drive major urban outbreaks of the disease. This mosquito doesn’t pack the same virus-spreading-punch as mosquitoes such as Aedes aegypti that spreads dengue, chikungunya and Zika viruses. Aedes aegypti isn’t in Victoria.

We’re unlikely to see significant spread of Ross River virus across Melbourne but that doesn’t mean Victorians should be complacent. As there is no cure for Ross River virus disease, the best approach is to avoid being infected in the first place. Preventing mosquito bites is the best approach. For my tips and tricks on avoiding mosquito bites see this recent paper in Public Health Research and Practice as well as my article for The Conversation.

Keep an eye on the website of Victoria Health for more information.

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Social media and blood suckers showcased at the International Congress of Entomology

instagram_wetlands_webb

Digital technology is changing a lot about how we undertake entomological research and communicate the results of that research to the community and policy makers.

This week in Orlando, Florida, is the International Congress of Entomology (ICE). A huge gathering of entomologists from around the world. While it was a great pleasure to be invited to participate, I couldn’t get over there this time.

I will, however, have a chance to present my work in the Symposium “Entomology in the Digital Age”  Friday, September 30, 2016 (01:30 PM – 04:45 PM), Convention Centre Room W222 A.

In the presentation I’ll share some of the reasoning behind my use of social media to engage the community with both entomological research and public health communication. Most importantly, it will focus on some of the metrics I’ve recorded alongside my use of social media, maintaining a blog of research and writing for outlets such as The Conversation.

I’ve written about my use of social media and how it can help extend the reach of public health messages and presented on the topic alongside a range of great speakers at the 2014 Entomological Society of America meeting in Portland.

This time around, technology is playing an even more direct role in my presentation! I’ve pre-recorded my presentation and it will be shown to the audience on the day among other presentations. I’ll also be checking into the session to answer questions. Despite the fact I’ll need to be up around 1:30am due to time differences, it should be fun.

See the abstract below…

Taking entomological research from the swamps to the suburbs with social media

Cameron E Webb

Connecting scientists and the community is critical. This is particularly the case for medical entomologists working in the field of mosquito-borne disease where the translation of entomological research into improved public health outcomes is a priority. While traditional media has been the mainstay of public health communications by local authorities, social media provides new avenues for disseminating information and engaging with the wider community. This presentation will share some insights into how the use of social media has connected new and old communications strategies to not only extend the reach of public health messages but also provide an opportunity to promote entomological research and wetland conservation. A range of social media platforms, including Twitter, Instagram, and WordPress, were employed to disseminate public health messages and engage the community and traditional media outlets. Engagement with the accounts of traditional media (e.g. radio, print, television, online) was found to be the main route to increased exposure and, subsequently, to increased access of public health information online. With the increasing accessibility of the community to online resources via smartphones, researchers and public health advocates must develop strategies to effectively use social media. Many people now turn to social media as a source of news and information and those in the field of public health, as well as entomological research more generally, must take advantage of these new opportunities. doi: 10.1603/ICE.2016.94611


If you’re at ICE, you can also catch up with my PhD student David Lilly who’ll be presenting our research into the development of insecticide resistance in bed bugs as part of the symposium “New Insights into Biology, Resistance Mechanisms, and the Management of the Modern Bed Bug” Friday, September 30, 2016, 01:30 PM – 04:45 PM, Convention Center, West Hall F4 (WF4).

Novel insecticide resistant mechanisms in the common bed bug, Cimex lectularius

David Lilly, Cameron E Webb and Stephen Doggett

Introduction: Research on field strains of Cimex lectularius from Australia has identified widespread resistance to pyrethroid insecticides, but variability in the magnitude expressed. To determine if differences in resistance mechanisms exist, collected strains were examined for the presence of metabolic detoxification and/or cuticle thickening. Methods: The presence and relative contribution of detoxifying esterases or cytochrome P450 monooxygenases were assessed. Bed bugs collected from Parramatta (NSW), Melbourne (VIC) – 2 strains, ‘No.2’ and ‘No.4’, and Alice Springs (NT) were exposed in topical bioassays employing deltamethrin and two pyrethroid synergists: piperonyl butoxide (PBO) and EN16/5-1. PBO inhibits both monooxygenases and esterases, whereas EN16/5-1 will inhibit esterases only. Thus in a comparative bioassay, the results can infer the dominant enzyme system. The Parramatta strain was then selected to study the potential presence of cuticle thickening. Nine-day-old male bed bugs were exposed to filter papers treated with the highest label rate of Demand Insecticide®(200mL/10L of 25g/L lambda-cyhalothrin) and were grouped according to time-to-knockdown (< 2 hours, ≥ 4 hours, and survivors at 24 hours). Measurements of mean cuticle thickness at the transverse midpoint of the second leg tarsus were taken under electron microscope. Results/Conclusion: All strains possessed resistance that was inhibited by the synergists, with the Parramatta and Melbourne No.2 indicating esterase-dominance, and Alice Springs and Melbourne No.4 indicating cytochrome P450 monooxygenase-dominance. Cuticular measurements demonstrated that bed bugs surviving deltamethrin exposure had significantly thicker cuticles, denoting a novel form of resistance in these insects. doi: 10.1603/ICE.2016.92553

 

You can also see Stephen Doggett (co-author and photographer of A Guide to Mosquitoes of Australia) speaking on photographing mosquitoes to in the symposium “Insect Photography Symposium: Bringing the Small to the World.


You can join the conversation on Twitter and keep an eye on all the fun in Orlando by keeping an eye on the tweet stream!

 

Moving pictures and managing mosquitoes

Mangroves_Video_June2016

For a few months now I’ve been thinking through some future options for the blog and my science communications activities. I’ve been toying around with starting a podcast or video blog about my work in local wetlands.

#MosquitoWeek has just happened in the U.S. and as it coincided with the close of entries with the Entomological Society of America YouTube competition, I thought what better time to play around with putting together a video.

A year or so ago I had the chance to see Karen McKee (aka The Scientist Videographer) talk about social media and the ways she uses video as a critical component of her community engagement and communications. Since I’m already using Instagram to connect followers with my various wetland sites and mosquito studies (as well as other things), I’ve thought video could be a way to go.

Interesting too since images and video are (or are soon to be) increasingly dominant in social media.

I’m an advocate for mosquito control to be part of overall wetland management. I think I’m sometimes seen as the enemy of wetland and wildlife conservation, not surprising given the perception of mosquito control still influenced by the DDT debate. As we push for the construction and rehabilitation of urban wetlands, the pest and public health risks associated with mosquito populations do need to be considered by local authorities.

I’m often arguing that ecologically sustainable mosquito management is actually critical to wetland conservation. If you’re encouraging the community to visit your wetlands, what happens when they’re chased away by mosquitoes? What about the community living around the wetland? Will nuisance-biting erode the good will of the community for wetland conservation?

You can watch my video, “Why is mosquito management important in our local wetlands?”, at YouTube or below:

You can check out some of my other posts of wetlands, mosquitoes and social media below:

Should we start pulling out mangroves to save our wetlands?

Does wetland rehabilitation need mosquito control?

Can social media help track environmental change?

Mosquitoes, constructed wetlands, urban design and climate change: Some workshop resources

Let me know if you’d be interested in seeing more videos! Send me a tweet.

Can social media help translate research to practice and promote informed public health messages?

I’m a Senior Investigator with the Centre for Infectious Diseases and Microbiology – Public Health. One of our primary focuses is translating research into improved public health outcomes. With NSW Population Health and Health Services Research Support Program assisting our work, we’re exploring new ways to achieve this objective. My experience of using social media was selected to be showcased among other case studies in 2015. 


Nuisance-biting mosquitoes and mosquito-borne disease are concerns for local authorities in Australia. 2015 saw the largest outbreak of mosquito-borne Ross River virus disease for more than 20 years with over 9,500 cases nationwide. In NSW, there were 1,633 cases compared to the annual average since 1993 of 742 cases per year. Notwithstanding the current outbreak, other endemic, as well as exotic, mosquito-borne pathogens represent future threats to public health.

As there is no large-scale mosquito control program in NSW, reducing the contact between mosquitoes and people is primarily achieved through the promotion of personal protection measures. NSW Health promotes the use of topical insect repellents in combination with behavioural change to avoid natural mosquito habitats and the creation of mosquito habitats around the home. This information is typically provided in the form of posters, brochures, online factsheets, and seasonal or outbreak-triggered public health messages issued by Local Health Districts or the NSW Ministry of Health.

With the emergence of new communications technologies, particularly the rise in popularity of social media, there are new opportunities for public health communications.

The aim of the current research was to determine the reach of public health messages through social media by tracking engagement, audience and relative value as assessed by media monitoring organisations and metrics provided by hosting services of social media platforms.

Assessing activities and processes

Dr Cameron Webb (CIDM-PH) has focused much attention on filling the gaps between current public health messages and findings from recent research into topical mosquito repellents.[1] For example, while public health messages provide accurate information on the insect repellents that provide the best protection, there is a paucity of information provided on how best these products should be used by individuals and those they care for.

Dr Webb’s engagement with mass media, online media (e.g. The Conversation), a personal blog (e.g. Mosquito Research and Management) and social media (e.g. Twitter) has resulted in substantial exposure of focused and informed public health messages. From mid-2014 through to the end of 2015, Dr Webb participated in over 80 mass media articles and interviews in print, online, radio and television media with public health information reaching an estimated audience of over 10 million people.[2] The focus of his messaging around mosquito-borne disease was to highlight the best way for the community to choose and use mosquito repellents; stressing the importance of active ingredients and application methods. This fills a gap in the current provision of public health information while also augmenting public health alerts and messages associated with the 2015 outbreak of Ross River virus disease.

Social media has become a “go to” source of information for much of the community. Information shared on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube has the potential to shape the habitats and behaviour of the community. Dr Webb is active on Twitter (currently followed by over 4,500 people); he uses the platform to engage with the social media accounts of journalists and broadcasters to establish a voice of authority in the field of mosquito-borne disease prevention and extend the reach and exposure of public health messages broadcast through mass media. Using Twitter to share links to informed articles following interviews reached hundreds of thousands of people by being shared by the social media accounts of journalists, media outlets, government organisations and community groups. During the 2014-2015 summer, tweets by Dr Webb reached an estimate 1.28 million people.[3]

Dr Webb regularly writes open access articles on his website, attracting around 250 daily visitors with over 117,000 article views.[4] In addition to his personal website, Dr Webb regularly contributes articles to The Conversation (a website for academics to share expert opinion and write about their latest research). His articles have attracted over 120,000 readers. However, one article “why mosquitoes seem to bite some people more” (published 26 January 2015) has alone been read by over 1.3 million people.[5] This “non-scholarly” writing not only establishes CIDM-PH scientists as authorities in public health matters but can also assist in directing the public to official health guidance provided on official websites and other sources.

Dr Webb’s activities provide a framework for how health authorities may engage with social media to extend public health messages. Organisations or individuals can connect health authority information with the community through media outlets. He has been invited to share his experiences in this field at local and international conferences and workshops including those coordinated by the Public Health Association of Australia, Australian Entomological Society and Entomological Society of America. In addition, Dr Webb has been invited to provide lectures on the benefits of social media for public health advocacy to undergraduate and post-graduate students at the University of Sydney.

While traditional messaging provided by health authorities will remain a staple in public health campaigns, social media provides a connection between traditional and emerging media and communication organisations. This increased connectivity between public health advocates, the media and community has the potential to greatly improve the awareness of mosquito-borne disease and increase the rate of uptake and application of strategic personal protection measures.

References

  1. Webb C.E. (2015). Are we doing enough to promote the effective use of mosquito repellents? Medical Journal of Australia, 202(3): 128-129.
  2. Estimated audience reported by Kobi Print, Media and Public Relations, University of Sydney, 23 April 2015, based on data provided by media monitoring organisation isentia.
  3. Estimated from total “tweet impressions” for the period October 2014 through April 2015 provided by Twitter Analytics (https://analytics.twitter.com/user/Mozziebites/home accessed 30 April 2015)
  4. Data provided by WordPress statistics (accessed 18 December 2015)
  5. Data provided by The Conversation metrics (accessed 18 December 2015)

This article was originally published by NSW Health showcasing some of the work within the NSW Population Health and Health Services Research Support Program. You can see the original article here.

Does Zika virus pose a threat to Australia?

They’re small, spindly insects but their threat never dwindles – the bites of mosquitoes threaten death and disease in many parts of the world. The emergence of a little-known virus, Zika, from an African forest, is the latest to alarm the public, politicians and health authorities because of its potential link to birth defects.

What is Zika virus?

Zika virus is a mosquito-borne virus closely related to dengue and Yellow Fever viruses. Discovered almost 70 years ago in a Ugandan forest, the virus generally only causes a mild illness. Symptoms include rash, fever, joint pain and conjunctivitis.

Severe symptoms aren’t common and the illness was never thought to be fatal.

Despite detection throughout Africa and Asia, the virus rarely entered the spotlight of scientific research. It was overshadowed by the spread and impact of dengue and chikungunya viruses, which infect millions of people across the regions.

In the last decade, Zika virus outbreaks have occurred in the Pacific, with reports of severe illness. But again, Zika was considered a lesser threat than dengue and chikungunya viruses.

Everything changed in 2015 when Zika virus reached the Americas.

New outbreaks and severe symptoms

Since the first local Zika virus infection, cases have been reported from at least 19 countries or territories in the Americas, with more than one million suspected cases.

Rapid spread of an emerging mosquito-borne pathogen is news enough but people are also panicked by reports of more serious consequences of Zika virus infections, including post-viral Guillain-Barré Syndrome, an autoimmune condition where there person’s nerves are attacked by their own body.

Of most concern has been the rapid rise in rates of microcephaly, a birth defect which causes babies to be born with unusually small heads, in regions where Zika virus has been circulating.

While the role of Zika virus as the cause of microcephaly has not yet been confirmed, there is growing evidence of a connection between the two where pregnant women have been infected with the virus.

Babies born with microcephaly, and those who died shortly after birth, have tested positive for the virus, and there are close regional associations between clusters of birth defects and Zika virus.

There is enough concern for the Centres for Disease Control to issue health warnings to pregnant women planning to travel to these regions. [This also includes the Australian Government] Some health authorities are even advising people to postpone pregnancies.

There is no vaccine for Zika virus. Stopping mosquito bites is the only way to prevent infection.

Is Australia at risk of a Zika virus outbreak?

There is little doubt the virus can make it to Australia. There have already been a number of infections reported in travellers arriving in Australia from the Cook Islands and Indonesia.

Mosquito-borne viruses generally aren’t spread from person to person. Only through the bite of an infected mosquito can the virus be transmitted.

In the case of Zika, there have been some unusual cases of transmission, including through sex and the bite of an infected monkey. Despite these unusual circumstances, mosquitoes will still play the most important role in any local transmission.

While dozens of mosquitoes are capable of spreading local mosquito-borne pathogens, such as Ross River virus, only one of the 300 or so mosquitoes found in Australia can transmit Zika virus: Aedes aegypti, the Yellow Fever Mosquito, which is only found in north Queensland.

The Yellow Fever mosquito, Aedes aegypti, is critical to the spread of Zika virus in many regions of the world, including Australia.

For local Aedes aegypti to spread Zika virus, they must bite an infected traveller shortly after they return from a country where the virus is circulating.

While the chances of this happening are small, there is then a risk of a local outbreak occurring as the infected mosquito bites people who’ve never left the country.

This is the process that occurs in outbreaks of dengue in Far North Queensland. If we can get outbreaks of dengue, there is no reason we cannot, or won’t, get an outbreak of Zika in the future.

How to reduce the risk of transmission

Fortunately, authorities are well placed to contain an outbreak of Zika virus, as the required strategies are the same as management of dengue outbreaks.

Perhaps the real message here for Australian authorities is that they need to work diligently to keep exotic mosquitoes out of the country.

While Aedes aegypti may not become established in southern cities, even with a changing climate, there is great potential that Aedes albopictus, better known as the Asian Tiger Mosquito, could become established in southern cities. As well as a vector of Zika virus, it can spread dengue and chikungunya viruses and be a significant nuisance-biting pest. Keeping this mosquito out of our cities is critical.

Australians planning travel to South and Central America, including the Rio Olympics, should take precautions to avoid mosquito bites. Irrespective of Zika virus, mosquito-borne dengue and chikungunya viruses have infected millions of people, causing thousands of deaths, in the last few years and are reason alone to pack mosquito repellents. Be prepared to cover up with long sleeved shorts and long pants if in regions where risk is high.

The ConversationThis article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Lessons from the dengue outbreak in Hawaii

Hawaii_1There are millions of cases of mosquito-borne disease world wide every year so why should we care about a few dozen dengue cases in Hawaii?

Hawaii is no stranger to dengue. There have been outbreaks first dating back to the 1840s. Travellers, including returning residents, are diagnosed with dengue routinely. However, this is the first outbreak of locally-acquired infection since 2011.

As of 17 November 2015, Hawaii Department of Health reports there have been approximately 65 locally acquired cases on Hawaii Island (aka Big Island) including both residents and visitors. Why has this happened and what lessons can be learned from the outbreak?

[update: As of 29 January 2016, there have been 242 confirmed cases of locally acquired dengue.]

Hawaii provides a fascinating example of the implications (as well as study of spread) of exotic mosquito invasions. With no endemic mosquito species, the pest species found in the Hawaiian islands have all been introduced from elsewhere.

The first mosquito to make it to Hawaii was Culex quinquefasciatus. It is thought to have arrived on a boat from Mexico in the mid 1820s. Interestingly, with no native mosquitoes in Hawaii, there was no word to describe them so they were initially referred to as “singing flies”.

In recent years, it has been the role of Culex quinquefasciatus in the spread of avian malaria that’s been grabbing the headlines. However, in the last few weeks, it has been Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus playing a role in the local spread of dengue virus in the spotlight. These two container-inhabiting mosquitoes are the key vectors of dengue viruses (as well as chikungunya, yellow fever and zika viruses) internationally. They’re driving the outbreak now as they have in the past.

There was an outbreak of dengue in 2001 with a total of 122 locally acquired cases. Cases were reported from Maui, Oahu and Kauai with the outbreak thought to have been triggered by travellers from French Polynesia where there was a major outbreak underway at the time. Between 1944 and 2001, the only cases of dengue reported in Hawaii were imported with travelers. Firstly, this highlights how important it is to understand the pathways of infected people, this can help guide assessments of risk.

This was also done from the potential introduction of West Nile virus into Hawaii. Analysing the movement of travelers from regions of endemic mosquito-borne disease has also been used to assess the risk of chikungunya virus introduction to North America.

It was believed that Aedes albopictus played an important role in this 2001 outbreak. This mosquito was not a significant presence in Hawaii until the 1940s. More importantly, Aedes albopictus is not exclusively found in water-holding containers in urban area. Unlike the other vector of dengue viruses, Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus is also found in bushland habitats. This makes mosquito control just a little more difficult when authorities need to look beyond the backyard.

Previous dengue outbreaks in Hawaii were thought to have been driven by Aedes aegypti. These outbreaks were significant with an estimated 30,000 cases in the early 1900s followed by approximately 1,500 cases around Honolulu in the period 1943-1944. While not necessarily easy to manage, outbreaks of dengue driven primarily by Aedes aegypti can be strategically targeted by residual insecticide treatments and community education. That education focuses on raising awareness of the public health risks associated with mosquitoes and the need to remove opportunities for mosquitoes to be breeding around dwellings. This model is essentially what is in place to address occasional outbreaks of dengue in Far North Queensland, Australia.

The current outbreak has raised concern in the community. Shelves of stores have been emptied of insecticides and repellents. Community meetings have been held by local authorities to provide information on dengue and address concerns on the Big Island. You can watch some of the meetings here. You can see some of the health promotion (aka “Fight the Bite”) flyers here.

Community engagement is important. An indirect impact of this engagement though is that the total number of confirmed cases of dengue on the Big Island is likely to rise over coming weeks. Not necessarily due to new cases but a greater likelihood that older cases will now be diagnosed through blood tests. Even those who may be suffering a mild illness are likely to be tested for infection and may end up in official statistics.

This dengue outbreak is a reminder to authorities across the world that where suitable mosquitoes are present, a risk of mosquito-borne disease outbreak is possible. The mosquitoes provide the tinder and it only takes the spark of an infected traveler to ignite an outbreak. We saw this in 2014 with the first outbreak of dengue in Japan for 70 years. We’ve seen it this year with local transmission of chikungunya virus in Spain and other outbreaks across Europe.

For Australian authorities, ensuring there are strategic responses in place to address the risk of exotic mosquito introduction, as well as outbreaks of disease, is critical. What this outbreak in Hawaii reminds us is that if Aedes albopictus becomes established in our major cities, it is only a matter of time before we see local outbreaks of dengue, chikungunya or Zika viruses.

What is it like if a loved one comes down with dengue? Check out the channel of YouTube stars Charles Trippy and Allie Wesenberg as they document their brush with mosquito-borne disease during this outbreak.

[Update: Implications for potential Zika virus spread] The recent spread of Zika virus in the Americas has raise concerns by health authorities. In particular, the spread of the virus to North America. What about Hawaii? There has already been one case of microcephaly in Hawaii with a baby born on Oahu to a mother who had been residing in Brazil. The pregnant women was infected in South America, not Hawaii. However, authorities should be on alert as travellers from the Americas, or the Pacific, have the potential to introduce the virus and the mosquitoes currently present in Hawaii spreading dengue viruses are the same that spread Zika virus.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Putting a value on science communication

For many scientists, communicating the ideas that underpin their areas of expertise to the public and policy makers is critical. Sharing the findings of research could make a difference to people’s lives, even if it is just to increase their appreciate of science and the world around them. But how do we value the communication of science by scientists?

Scientists often bemoan the lack of acknowledgment of their scientific communications and community engagement efforts. There is little doubt that these “outreach” activities receive far less “academic credit” than publication in high impact journals.

Writing for “popular science” outlets is often perceived to be a career negative. While some argue there needs to be capacity for the community engagement efforts of scientists to be acknowledged in the assessment of academic accomplishment, others argue against it. Regardless of your motivations, if you’re going to engage in science communication, it is best to make the most of your activities but even when your research goes vial, how can you put a value on this?

How can you value your science communications in a way that may be recognised for employment, promotion, grant applications etc?

repellentbandOne of my recent articles for The Conversation, why mosquitoes seem to bite some people more, went a little bit viral. Almost 1.3 million people clicked on that article. Would I swap it for an article in Nature (or any other scholarly publication with a high impact factor) that only 20 people read? Probably as it would make a far more valuable contribution to my career…but would it have the same potential to change people’s awareness and behaviour in avoiding mosquito bites? Probably not.

I’ve written before about the importance of social media in getting the public health messages informed by my research out to the public. A blog post I wrote about the shortcomings of mosquito repellent wrist bands in protecting people against mosquito bites is the most read post on my blog. Since first published, the article “Do mosquito repellent wrist bands work?” has been read by around 47,000 people. The original paper, published in a journal without an impact factor, may have been read by only dozens of people if I hadn’t written about it on my blog.

repellents2

I’m increasingly asked to provide evidence of “engagement” or “translation” activities associated with my research. This is particularly the case for my activities with Centre for infectious Disease and Microbiology Public Health where translating research for improved public health outcomes is a key objective. Those outcomes have generally been focused on providing informed guidance to local authorities on infectious disease surveillance, diagnosis and treatment.

What about community engagement?

I wanted to share how I’ve been trying to value my science communication activities in recent years. My general approach to this is to document as much detail as possible about individual activities, try to quantify the reach of activities (as much as possible) and to try to use my experience with these activities into what could be best described as my “core” activities.

In the same way you may incorporate a new laboratory technique or statistical analysis into your research, why not incorporate your science communication activities similarly?

Webb_NineNews_March2015

Every summer I find myself standing in the mangroves talking to a camera (while being bitten by mosquitoes)

Media activities

In the summer past, I’ve been interviewed about 50 times on research findings, disease outbreaks and topical issues associated with mosquitoes and mosquito-borne disease. This level of activity clearly holds the potential to engage the wider community with important public health messages as well as (hopefully) improve their understanding of local scientists and their research.

While keeping a track of the interviews and their details (date, topic, journalist, outlet etc) is handy, it is also possible to go beyond that to record audience reach and assign a relative value. This is where you’ll need the help of your institute’s media and communications unit. They should be able to obtain reports from media monitoring organisations that keep track of details (interview summary points and duration, audience size, estimated value) associated with media activities.

For example, on 16 January 2015 I did a live cross to Channel 7’s Sunrise program. The interview ran for just over 3 minutes, issues about mosquito-borne disease risk and personal protection measures were covered, it had an estimated audience of over 500,000 and was valued at around $200,000.

Over the course of a year (or perhaps a research project), it is possible to assign both a financial and engagement value? For me, the media activities over the 2014-2015 summer had an estimate audience of around 8 million and value of over $600,000. This extra level of detail adds so much extra weight to the value of science communications activities.

mosquitobites_magazines

Mosquito Bites is the bulletin of the Mosquito Control Association of Australia. Distributed to members throughout Australia and many other countries, it provides information on the operational aspects of mosquito and mosquito-borne disease management.

Popular science writing

I regularly contribute articles to non-scholarly publications, these include newsletters, bulletins and magazines produced by local community groups, industry bodies and scientific associations. As well as recording the specific details about each article, it is also possible to record circulation as a measure of engagement.

If you need to add a financial value to these articles, why not consider what the current rates are for freelance journalists? They seem to be around $0.40-1.00 per word, that makes any (non-scholarly journal) writing associated with research projects as an “in kind” contribution valued at around $500-600? Planning on writing an article associated with an upcoming research project, why not include this extra value as an “in kind” contribution?

I regularly write for The Conversation. The website provides excellent data on the readership of individual articles (including with respect to other contributors from your institution) in addition to republication and social network sharing. Most of my articles receive around 6,000-8,000 reads but many have also reached around 20,000. Again, this is typically substantially greater exposure than received by my articles in scholarly journals. Recording this additional information would help make a handy argument that non-academic writing holds value, especially when arguing about research translation.

Output from @mozziebites Twitter Analytics for February 2015

Output from @mozziebites Twitter Analytics for February 2015 showing data on impressions and engagement with my Tweets during the month.

Social media activity

Got a Twitter account or Facebook page? It is obviously great to keep track of your follower numbers, retweets, likes and shares of tweets and posts. It is a way to demonstrate engagement with the community. I started tracking my activity on Twitter early on. I was partly interested in whether people would engage with tweets about mozzies but I also wanted to demonstrate to my “bosses” that using social media for “work purposes” had some benefits in line with the public health objectives of my research activities. There was also a very nice paper published in 2012 that provided a framework for assessing the engagement of health authorities with social media and I wanted to gather similar data.

For Twitter users, you can access data on your own account via Twitter Analytics. It provides plenty of useful information, especially engagements (i.e. total number of times a user interacted with a Tweet, including retweets, replies, follows, favorites, links, cards, hashtags, embedded media, username, profile photo, or Tweet expansion), impressions (i.e. times a user is served a Tweet in timeline or search results) and link clicks (i.e. clicks on a URL in the Tweet). This kind of data can help demonstrate the extent to which the online community is interacting with your own social media activity.

It will also help if you engage with your institution on social media. Help promote their activities and those of your colleagues and collaborators. In turn they’ll help raise your profile too.

ABCOpenDay_ParramattaPark_WebbGiggle

Speaking at public events provides opportunities to meet a wide cross section of the community….even celebrities such as Jimmy Giggle at the ABC community event at Parramatta Park, April 2014.

Community presentations

Every year i speak at a range of community events. In the past year or so I’ve spoken at such diverse events as Sydney Olympic Park Authority’s Life in the Park, Australian Skeptics in the Pub, Cumberland Birds Observer’s Cub meeting, Oatley Flora and Fauna Conservation Society meeting and Pint of Science. This provides an opportunity to speak to a wide cross section of the community but is also an opportunity to document experience in communicating to different audiences.

As well as keeping track of these speaking engagements (date, title, location, hosting organisation), I also try to record the number of attendees and most of the time I make a note of questions asked. This, again, is a way to document engagement/translation of research. It can also form a foundation for how you may shape research, it has particularly been the case for me reviewing the way we share public health information relating to the promotion of insect repellent use.

Communications and publications

Finally, think about ways you can parlay your experience with science communication into output that’s recognised by your organisation or institute. Why not write a perspectives piece, commentary or letter to the editor? I’m regularly seeing articles popping up in peer reviewed journals explaining the benefits of using social media, why not target a journal within your field that may not have covered the topic. You only need to see the metrics on this paper, ‘An Introduction to Social Media for Scientists‘, to realise that there is plenty of interest and having an extra journal article under your belt won’t hurt either.

Similarly, if you’re being asked to speak at conferences and workshops on your use of social media and/or science communication strategies, make sure you’re recording all those details too.

To conclude, there may not (yet) be a magic number to assign to your science communications activity in the same way impact factors and altmetrics help measure the success of traditional academic output. However, that doesn’t mean you cannot record a bunch of “metrics” associated with science communications, both online and off, that will hopefully better place you for that next job offer or promotion.

What do you think? How do you document your scientific communications activities? Join the conversation on Twitter.