↓ Skip to main content

In vivo efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-amodiaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in children: a multisite, open-label, two-cohort, clinical trial in…

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
In vivo efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-amodiaquine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in children: a multisite, open-label, two-cohort, clinical trial in Mozambique
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-13-309
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abel Nhama, Quique Bassat, Sónia Enosse, Arsenio Nhacolo, Rosália Mutemba, Eva Carvalho, Eva Naueia, Esperança Sevene, Caterina Guinovart, Marian Warsame, Sergi Sanz, Abdul Mussa, Graça Matsinhe, Pedro Alonso, Armindo Tiago, Eusebio Macete

Abstract

Mozambique adopted artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the year 2006, and since 2009 artemether-lumefantrine (AL) and artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ) have been proposed as alternative first-line treatments. A multicentre study was conducted in five sites across the country to assess the in vivo efficacy and tolerability of these two drugs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Spain 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 68 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Master 10 14%
Other 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 15%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 19 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 August 2014.
All research outputs
#13,864,911
of 23,925,854 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,390
of 5,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,427
of 233,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#60
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,925,854 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,755 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 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 233,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.