↓ Skip to main content

Poor response to artesunate treatment in two patients with severe malaria on the Thai–Myanmar border

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Poor response to artesunate treatment in two patients with severe malaria on the Thai–Myanmar border
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2182-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aung Pyae Phyo, Kyaw Kyaw Win, Aung Myint Thu, Lei Lei Swe, Htike, Candy Beau, Kanlaya Sriprawat, Markus Winterberg, Stephane Proux, Mallika Imwong, Elizabeth A. Ashley, Francois Nosten

Abstract

Malaria has declined dramatically along the Thai-Myanmar border in recent years due to malaria control and elimination programmes. However, at the same time, artemisinin resistance has spread, raising concerns about the efficacy of parenteral artesunate for the treatment of severe malaria. In November 2015 and April 2017, two patients were treated for severe malaria with parenteral artesunate. Quinine was added within 24 h due to an initial poor response to treatment. The first patient died within 24 h of starting treatment and the second did not clear his peripheral parasitaemia until 11 days later. Genotyping revealed artemisinin resistance Kelch-13 markers. Reliable efficacy of artesunate for the treatment of severe malaria may no longer be assured in areas where artemisinin resistance has emerged. Empirical addition of parenteral quinine to artesunate for treatment is recommended as a precautionary measure.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Student > Master 6 13%
Lecturer 2 4%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 13 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,186,315
of 18,844,683 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#801
of 5,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,577
of 478,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#100
of 492 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,844,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 478,535 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 492 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.