↓ Skip to main content

Risk factors for measles death: Kyegegwa District, western Uganda, February–September, 2015

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, July 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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Risk factors for measles death: Kyegegwa District, western Uganda, February–September, 2015
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2558-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richardson Mafigiri, Fred Nsubuga, Alex Riolexus Ario

Abstract

On 18 August 2015, Kyegegwa District reported eight deaths during a measles outbreak to the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH). We investigated this death cluster to verify the cause, identify risk factors, and inform public health interventions. We defined a probable measles case as onset of fever and generalised rash in a Kyegegwa District resident from 1 February - 15 September 2015, plus ≥1 of the following: coryza, conjunctivitis, and cough. A confirmed measles case was a probable case with measles-specific IgM positivity. A measles death was a death of a probable or confirmed case-person. We conducted an active case-finding to identify measles patients who survived or died. In a case-control study, we compared risk factors between 16 measles patients who died (cases) and 48 who survived (controls), matched by age (±4 years) and village of residence. We identified 94 probable measles cases, 10 (11%) were confirmed by positive measles-specific IgM. Of the 64 probable measles patients aged <5 years, 16 died (case-fatality rate = 25%). In the case-control study, no history of vaccination against measles was found in 94% (15/16) among the case-persons (i.e., measles patients who died) and 54% (26/48) among the controls (i.e., measles patients who survived) (ORM-H = 12; 95% CI = 1.6-104), while 56% (9/16) of case-persons and 67% (17/48) of controls (ORM-H = 2.3; 95% CI =0.74-7.4) did not receive vitamin A supplementation during illness. 63% (10/16) among the case-persons and 6.3% (3/48) of the controls (ORM-H = 33; 95% CI = 6.8-159) were not treated for measles illness at a health facility (a proxy for more appropriate treatment), while 38% (6/16) of the case-persons and 25% (12/48) of the controls (ORM-H = 2.5; 95% CI = 0.67-9.1) were malnourished. Lack of vaccination and no treatment in a health facility increased the risk for measles deaths. The one-dose measles vaccination currently in the national vaccination schedule had a protective effect against measles death. We recommended enhancing measles vaccination and adherence to measles treatment guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 26%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 10 11%
Other 5 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 28 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 10 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,754,003
of 24,853,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#868
of 8,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,913
of 318,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#18
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,853,509 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 8,353 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 318,968 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 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 91% of its contemporaries.