↓ Skip to main content

Land cover, land use and malaria in the Amazon: a systematic literature review of studies using remotely sensed data

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 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
Land cover, land use and malaria in the Amazon: a systematic literature review of studies using remotely sensed data
Published in
Malaria Journal, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-12-192
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aurélia Stefani, Isabelle Dusfour, Ana Paula SA Corrêa, Manoel CB Cruz, Nadine Dessay, Allan KR Galardo, Clícia D Galardo, Romain Girod, Margarete SM Gomes, Helen Gurgel, Ana Cristina F Lima, Eduardo S Moreno, Lise Musset, Mathieu Nacher, Alana CS Soares, Bernard Carme, Emmanuel Roux

Abstract

The nine countries sharing the Amazon forest accounted for 89% of all malaria cases reported in the Americas in 2008. Remote sensing can help identify the environmental determinants of malaria transmission and their temporo-spatial evolution. Seventeen studies characterizing land cover or land use features, and relating them to malaria in the Amazon subregion, were identified. These were reviewed in order to improve the understanding of the land cover/use class roles in malaria transmission. The indicators affecting the transmission risk were summarized in terms of temporal components, landscape fragmentation and anthropic pressure. This review helps to define a framework for future studies aiming to characterize and monitor malaria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Peru 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 193 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 18%
Researcher 30 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Other 38 19%
Unknown 39 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 20%
Environmental Science 37 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 15 8%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 51 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 June 2013.
All research outputs
#13,890,926
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,731
of 5,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,586
of 197,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#60
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,545 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 197,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.