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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Meta-analysis of studies on chemical, physical and biological agents in the control of Aedes aegypti
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-2199-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Estelita Pereira Lima, Marília Oliveira Fonseca Goulart, Modesto Leite Rolim Neto |
| Abstract |
Aedes aegypti is a vector of international concern because it can transmit to humans three important arboviral diseases: yellow fever, dengue and chikungunya. Epidemics that are repeated year after year in a variety of urban centers indicate that there are control failures, allowing the vector to continue expanding. To identify the most effective vector control strategies and the factors that contributed to the success or failure of each strategy, we carried out a systematic review with meta-analysis of articles published in 12 databases, from 1974 to the month of December 2013. We evaluated the association between the use of whatever chemical substance, mechanical agent, biological or integrated actions against A. aegypti and the control of the vector, as measured by 10 indicators. We found 2,791 articles, but after careful selection, only 26 studies remained for analysis related to control interventions implemented in 15 countries, with 5 biological, 5 chemical, 3 mechanical and 13 integrated strategies. The comparison among all of them, indicated that the control of A. aegypti is significantly associated with the type of strategy used, and that integrated interventions consist of the most effective method for controlling A. aegypti. The most effective control method was the integrated approach, considering the influence of eco-bio-social determinants in the virus-vector-man epidemiological chain, and community involvement, starting with community empowerment as active agents of vector control. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 171 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 15% |
| Researcher | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 39 | 22% |
| Unknown | 50 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 35 | 20% |
| Unknown | 52 | 29% |
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 22 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,437,553
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,407
of 14,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,974
of 267,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#240
of 331 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 267,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 331 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.