↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the transmission dynamics of Leishmania donovani to provide robust evidence for interventions to eliminate visceral leishmaniasis in Bihar, India

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, January 2016
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 (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
Understanding the transmission dynamics of Leishmania donovani to provide robust evidence for interventions to eliminate visceral leishmaniasis in Bihar, India
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1309-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary M. Cameron, Alvaro Acosta-Serrano, Caryn Bern, Marleen Boelaert, Margriet den Boer, Sakib Burza, Lloyd A. C. Chapman, Alexandra Chaskopoulou, Michael Coleman, Orin Courtenay, Simon Croft, Pradeep Das, Erin Dilger, Geraldine Foster, Rajesh Garlapati, Lee Haines, Angela Harris, Janet Hemingway, T. Déirdre Hollingsworth, Sarah Jervis, Graham Medley, Michael Miles, Mark Paine, Albert Picado, Richard Poché, Paul Ready, Matthew Rogers, Mark Rowland, Shyam Sundar, Sake J. de Vlas, David Weetman

Abstract

Visceral Leishmaniasis (VL) is a neglected vector-borne disease. In India, it is transmitted to humans by Leishmania donovani-infected Phlebotomus argentipes sand flies. In 2005, VL was targeted for elimination by the governments of India, Nepal and Bangladesh by 2015. The elimination strategy consists of rapid case detection, treatment of VL cases and vector control using indoor residual spraying (IRS). However, to achieve sustained elimination of VL, an appropriate post elimination surveillance programme should be designed, and crucial knowledge gaps in vector bionomics, human infection and transmission need to be addressed. This review examines the outstanding knowledge gaps, specifically in the context of Bihar State, India.The knowledge gaps in vector bionomics that will be of immediate benefit to current control operations include better estimates of human biting rates and natural infection rates of P. argentipes, with L. donovani, and how these vary spatially, temporally and in response to IRS. The relative importance of indoor and outdoor transmission, and how P. argentipes disperse, are also unknown. With respect to human transmission it is important to use a range of diagnostic tools to distinguish individuals in endemic communities into those who: 1) are to going to progress to clinical VL, 2) are immune/refractory to infection and 3) have had past exposure to sand flies.It is crucial to keep in mind that close to elimination, and post-elimination, VL cases will become infrequent, so it is vital to define what the surveillance programme should target and how it should be designed to prevent resurgence. Therefore, a better understanding of the transmission dynamics of VL, in particular of how rates of infection in humans and sand flies vary as functions of each other, is required to guide VL elimination efforts and ensure sustained elimination in the Indian subcontinent. By collecting contemporary entomological and human data in the same geographical locations, more precise epidemiological models can be produced. The suite of data collected can also be used to inform the national programme if supplementary vector control tools, in addition to IRS, are required to address the issues of people sleeping outside.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Unknown 139 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Researcher 24 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 5%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 36 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,436,551
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#953
of 5,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,689
of 396,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#27
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 396,850 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.