↓ Skip to main content

Spatially explicit multi-criteria decision analysis for managing vector-borne diseases

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Health Geographics, January 2011
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
1 tweeter
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
Spatially explicit multi-criteria decision analysis for managing vector-borne diseases
Published in
International Journal of Health Geographics, January 2011
DOI 10.1186/1476-072x-10-70
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valerie Hongoh, Anne Hoen, Cécile Aenishaenslin, Jean-Philippe Waaub, Denise Bélanger, Pascal Michel

Abstract

The complex epidemiology of vector-borne diseases creates significant challenges in the design and delivery of prevention and control strategies, especially in light of rapid social and environmental changes. Spatial models for predicting disease risk based on environmental factors such as climate and landscape have been developed for a number of important vector-borne diseases. The resulting risk maps have proven value for highlighting areas for targeting public health programs. However, these methods generally only offer technical information on the spatial distribution of disease risk itself, which may be incomplete for making decisions in a complex situation. In prioritizing surveillance and intervention strategies, decision-makers often also need to consider spatially explicit information on other important dimensions, such as the regional specificity of public acceptance, population vulnerability, resource availability, intervention effectiveness, and land use. There is a need for a unified strategy for supporting public health decision making that integrates available data for assessing spatially explicit disease risk, with other criteria, to implement effective prevention and control strategies. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a decision support tool that allows for the consideration of diverse quantitative and qualitative criteria using both data-driven and qualitative indicators for evaluating alternative strategies with transparency and stakeholder participation. Here we propose a MCDA-based approach to the development of geospatial models and spatially explicit decision support tools for the management of vector-borne diseases. We describe the conceptual framework that MCDA offers as well as technical considerations, approaches to implementation and expected outcomes. We conclude that MCDA is a powerful tool that offers tremendous potential for use in public health decision-making in general and vector-borne disease management in particular.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 192 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 18%
Student > Master 34 17%
Other 18 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 38 19%
Unknown 25 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 15%
Environmental Science 30 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 12%
Engineering 21 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 13 6%
Other 52 25%
Unknown 34 17%

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 02 February 2012.
All research outputs
#7,240,512
of 12,545,316 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#279
of 475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,986
of 216,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#11
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,545,316 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 216,610 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.