↓ Skip to main content

Modelling typhoid risk in Dhaka Metropolitan Area of Bangladesh: the role of socio-economic and environmental factors

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
Modelling typhoid risk in Dhaka Metropolitan Area of Bangladesh: the role of socio-economic and environmental factors
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1476-072x-12-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert J Corner, Ashraf M Dewan, Masahiro Hashizume

Abstract

Developing countries in South Asia, such as Bangladesh, bear a disproportionate burden of diarrhoeal diseases such as cholera, typhoid and paratyphoid. These seem to be aggravated by a number of social and environmental factors such as lack of access to safe drinking water, overcrowdedness and poor hygiene brought about by poverty. Some socioeconomic data can be obtained from census data whilst others are more difficult to elucidate. This study considers a range of both census data and spatial data from other sources, including remote sensing, as potential predictors of typhoid risk. Typhoid data are aggregated from hospital admission records for the period from 2005 to 2009. The spatial and statistical structures of the data are analysed and principal axis factoring is used to reduce the degree of co-linearity in the data. The resulting factors are combined into a quality of life index, which in turn is used in a regression model of typhoid occurrence and risk.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 119 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 5 4%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 32 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 22%
Social Sciences 15 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 9%
Environmental Science 8 6%
Engineering 7 6%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 35 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 October 2018.
All research outputs
#8,262,107
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#270
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,821
of 210,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 210,337 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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.