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 |
Willingness to pay for small solar powered bed net fans: results of a Becker–DeGroot–Marschak auction in Ghana
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-017-1965-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joshua O. Yukich, Olivier J. T. Briët, Collins K. Ahorlu, Peter Nardini, Joseph Keating |
| Abstract |
Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are one of the main interventions recommended by the World Health Organization for malaria vector control. LLINs are ineffective if they are not being used. Subsequent to the completion of a cluster randomized cross over trial conducted in rural Greater Accra where participants were provided with the 'Bɔkɔɔ System'-a set of solar powered net fan and light consoles with a solar panel and battery-or alternative household water filters, all trial participants were invited to participate in a Becker-DeGroot-Marschak auction to determine the mean willingness to pay (WTP) for the fan and light consoles and to estimate the demand curve for the units. Results demonstraed a mean WTP of approximately 55 Cedis (~13 USD). Demand results suggested that at a price which would support full manufacturing cost recovery, a majority of households in the area would be willing to purchase at least one such unit. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 20% |
| Unknown | 12 | 30% |
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 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#19,305,317
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#5,042
of 5,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,516
of 322,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#122
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 322,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.