↓ Skip to main content

Ivermectin to reduce malaria transmission III. Considerations regarding regulatory and policy pathways

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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 III. Considerations regarding regulatory and policy pathways
Published in
Malaria Journal, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-1803-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Chaccour, N. Regina Rabinovich

Abstract

Vector control is a task previously relegated to products that (a) kill the mosquitoes directly at different stages (insecticides, larvicides, baited traps), or (b) avoid/reduce human-mosquito contact (bed nets, repellents, house screening), thereby reducing transmission. The potential community-based administration of the endectocide ivermectin with the intent to kill mosquitoes that bite humans, and thus reduce malaria transmission, offers a novel approach using a well-known drug, but additional steps are required to address technical, regulatory and policy gaps. The proposed community administration of this drug presents dual novel paradigms; first, indirect impact on the community rather than on individuals, and second, the use of a drug for vector control. In this paper, the main questions related to the regulatory and policy pathways for such an application are identified. Succinct answers are proposed for how the efficacy, safety, acceptability, cost-effectiveness and programmatic suitability could result in regulatory approval and ultimately policy recommendations on the use of ivermectin as a complementary vector control tool.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 88 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 22%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 29 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 August 2023.
All research outputs
#3,212,349
of 25,378,162 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#699
of 5,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,783
of 326,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#23
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,913 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 well, scoring higher than 88% 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 326,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.