↓ Skip to main content

Filariasis serosurvey, New Caledonia, South Pacific, 2013

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Filariasis serosurvey, New Caledonia, South Pacific, 2013
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13071-015-0713-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maguy Daures, Julie Champagnat, Anne Pfannstiel, Frédérique Ringuenoire, Jean-Paul Grangeon, Didier Musso

Abstract

Lymphatic filariasis (LF) is a major public health problem in the Pacific. As the global prevalence of infection was not known in New Caledonia (NC), a serosurvey study was conducted by determining the prevalence of circulating filarial antigens, as recommended by the World Health Organization. A cross sectional study on a 2 degree stratified sample was carried out from June to November 2013. Inclusion criteria were: individuals aged 2 to 80 y/o, who had been hospitalized or sought medical care for a non-infectious cause and who had been living in NC for more than 6 months. LF antigenic detection was performed using the immunocromatographic BinaxNOW filariasis card test (ICT). Among the 1,035 individuals tested, 7 were antigenic. The overall LF antigenic prevalence was 0.62% (CI 95% [0.60-0.63]). All patients were unrelated to each other; none of them presented clinical symptoms of LF. Four of the 7 ICT positive patients reported having travelled to LF endemic areas, 2 patients had never traveled outside NC and the last one had only traveled in non-endemic areas. For the 7 ICT positive patients, the research of microfilariae in blood smears and filarial DNA by PCR was negative. The prevalence of filarial antigenemia in NC is less than 1%, the threshold that defines the filarial endemic areas for WHO. Nevertheless, as two patients who had never travelled outside NC and one who had only travelled to non-endemic areas were antigenic, we cannot conclude that NC is totally free of LF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 5%
Unknown 20 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 24%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 24%
Environmental Science 2 10%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 11 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 February 2015.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#3,447
of 5,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,360
of 385,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#77
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 385,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.