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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Large-scale use of mosquito larval source management for malaria control in Africa: a cost analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2875-10-338 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eve Worrall, Ulrike Fillinger |
| Abstract |
At present, large-scale use of two malaria vector control methods, long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) is being scaled up in Africa with substantial funding from donors. A third vector control method, larval source management (LSM), has been historically very successful and is today widely used for mosquito control globally, except in Africa. With increasing risk of insecticide resistance and a shift to more exophilic vectors, LSM is now under re-evaluation for use against afro-tropical vector species. Here the costs of this intervention were evaluated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Senegal | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 191 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 17% |
| Researcher | 30 | 15% |
| Lecturer | 14 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 17% |
| Unknown | 36 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 50 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 30 | 15% |
| Unknown | 43 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 May 2016.
All research outputs
#3,541,655
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#826
of 5,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,824
of 142,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#13
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,535 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 done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 142,921 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.