↓ Skip to main content

Ivermectin to reduce malaria transmission: a research agenda for a promising new tool for elimination

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, May 2013
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
153 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
276 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
Ivermectin to reduce malaria transmission: a research agenda for a promising new tool for elimination
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-12-153
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos J Chaccour, Kevin C Kobylinski, Quique Bassat, Teun Bousema, Chris Drakeley, Pedro Alonso, Brian D Foy

Abstract

The heterogeneity of malaria transmission makes widespread elimination a difficult goal to achieve. Most of the current vector control measures insufficiently target outdoor transmission. Also, insecticide resistance threatens to diminish the efficacy of the most prevalent measures, indoor residual spray and insecticide treated nets. Innovative approaches are needed. The use of endectocides, such as ivermectin, could be an important new addition to the toolbox of anti-malarial measures. Ivermectin effectively targets outdoor transmission, has a novel mechanism of action that could circumvent resistance and might be distributed over the channels already in place for the control of onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 276 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 269 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 50 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 14%
Student > Master 40 14%
Student > Bachelor 29 11%
Student > Postgraduate 20 7%
Other 47 17%
Unknown 50 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 54 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Environmental Science 9 3%
Other 41 15%
Unknown 66 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 18 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,155,225
of 25,473,687 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#156
of 5,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,882
of 205,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#2
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,473,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 205,516 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 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 98% of its contemporaries.