↓ 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)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
188 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
360 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 360 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 8 2%
United Kingdom 8 2%
United States 5 1%
Australia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 329 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 96 27%
Researcher 61 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 55 15%
Student > Bachelor 30 8%
Student > Postgraduate 28 8%
Other 65 18%
Unknown 25 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 153 43%
Social Sciences 58 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 5%
Psychology 8 2%
Other 54 15%
Unknown 31 9%

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
#2,343,540
of 19,745,145 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#563
of 5,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,477
of 275,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,745,145 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 5,124 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. 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 275,485 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them