↓ Skip to main content

A social-ecological analysis of community perceptions of dengue fever and Aedes aegypti in Machala, Ecuador

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
215 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
A social-ecological analysis of community perceptions of dengue fever and Aedes aegypti in Machala, Ecuador
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1135
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna M Stewart Ibarra, Valerie A Luzadis, Mercy J Borbor Cordova, Mercy Silva, Tania Ordoñez, Efraín Beltrán Ayala, Sadie J Ryan

Abstract

The growing burden of dengue fever and the lack of a vaccine or specific medical treatment have increased the urgency of the public health sector to identify alternative management strategies. A prevailing trend in Latin America has been a shift towards decentralized vector control programs with integrated management strategies, requiring significant intersectoral coordination, community engagement, and knowledge of the local social-ecological system (SES). Community perceptions and responses are a critical component of this system, since perceptions shape actions, and thus govern behavioral responses and acceptance of shifts in policy and management.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 209 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 52 24%
Researcher 34 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 10%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Other 11 5%
Other 38 18%
Unknown 36 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 13%
Social Sciences 21 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 9%
Environmental Science 13 6%
Other 38 18%
Unknown 48 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#949,884
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,126
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,666
of 230,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#151
of 1,046 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 230,755 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,046 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.