↓ Skip to main content

Guidelines and mindlines: why do clinical staff over-diagnose malaria in Tanzania? A qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, April 2008
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
178 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
352 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
Guidelines and mindlines: why do clinical staff over-diagnose malaria in Tanzania? A qualitative study
Published in
Malaria Journal, April 2008
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-7-53
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clare IR Chandler, Caroline Jones, Gloria Boniface, Kaseem Juma, Hugh Reyburn, Christopher JM Whitty

Abstract

Malaria over-diagnosis in Africa is widespread and costly both financially and in terms of morbidity and mortality from missed diagnoses. An understanding of the reasons behind malaria over-diagnosis is urgently needed to inform strategies for better targeting of antimalarials.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 352 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 9 3%
Tanzania, United Republic of 8 2%
United States 5 1%
Spain 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 320 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 95 27%
Researcher 62 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 55 16%
Student > Postgraduate 28 8%
Student > Bachelor 28 8%
Other 63 18%
Unknown 21 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 152 43%
Social Sciences 58 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 5%
Environmental Science 7 2%
Other 53 15%
Unknown 26 7%

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 22 August 2018.
All research outputs
#1,624,227
of 14,668,766 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#420
of 4,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,012
of 247,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#11
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,668,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 247,440 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 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 92% of its contemporaries.