↓ Skip to main content

Forecasting malaria in a highly endemic country using environmental and clinical predictors

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Forecasting malaria in a highly endemic country using environmental and clinical predictors
Published in
Malaria Journal, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0758-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kate Zinszer, Ruth Kigozi, Katia Charland, Grant Dorsey, Timothy F Brewer, John S Brownstein, Moses R Kamya, David L Buckeridge

Abstract

Malaria thrives in poor tropical and subtropical countries where local resources are limited. Accurate disease forecasts can provide public and clinical health services with the information needed to implement targeted approaches for malaria control that make effective use of limited resources. The objective of this study was to determine the relevance of environmental and clinical predictors of malaria across different settings in Uganda. Forecasting models were based on health facility data collected by the Uganda Malaria Surveillance Project and satellite-derived rainfall, temperature, and vegetation estimates from 2006 to 2013. Facility-specific forecasting models of confirmed malaria were developed using multivariate autoregressive integrated moving average models and produced weekly forecast horizons over a 52-week forecasting period. The model with the most accurate forecasts varied by site and by forecast horizon. Clinical predictors were retained in the models with the highest predictive power for all facility sites. The average error over the 52 forecasting horizons ranged from 26 to 128% whereas the cumulative burden forecast error ranged from 2 to 22%. Clinical data, such as drug treatment, could be used to improve the accuracy of malaria predictions in endemic settings when coupled with environmental predictors. Further exploration of malaria forecasting is necessary to improve its accuracy and value in practice, including examining other environmental and intervention predictors, including insecticide-treated nets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 101 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 20%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 12%
Computer Science 9 9%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Other 28 27%
Unknown 20 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#6,308,111
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,798
of 5,545 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,106
of 264,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#39
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,545 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 264,294 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.