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 |
Evaluation of mass drug administration in the program to control imported lymphatic filariasis in Thailand
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-2325-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tanaporn Toothong, Mathuros Tipayamongkholgul, Nawarat Suwannapong, Saravudh Suvannadabba |
| Abstract |
Migration plays a major role in the emergence and resurgence of lymphatic filariasis (LF) in many countries. Because of the high prevalence of Imported Bancroftian Filariasis (IBF) caused by nocturnally periodic Wuchereria bancrofti and the intensive movement of immigrant workers from endemic areas, Thailand has implemented two doses of 6 mg/kg diethylcarbamazine (DEC) with interval of 6 months to prevent IBF. In areas where immigrants are very mobile, the administration of DEC may be compromised. This study aimed to evaluate DEC administration and its barriers in such areas. A cross-sectional study with two-stage stratified cluster sampling was conducted. We selected Myanmar immigrants aged >18 years from factory and fishery areas of Samut Sakhon Province for interview with a structured questionnaire. We also interviewed health personnel regarding the functions of the LF program and practice of DEC delivery among immigrants. Associations were measured by multiple logistic regression, at P <0.05. DEC coverage among the immigrants was 75 %, below the national target. All had received DEC only once during health examinations at general hospitals for work permit renewals. None of the health centers in each community provided DEC. Significant barriers to DEC access included being undocumented (adjusted OR = 74.23; 95 % CI = 26.32-209.34), unemployed (adjusted OR = 5.09; 95 % CI = 3.39-7.64), daily employed (adjusted OR = 4.33; 95 % CI = 2.91-6.46), short-term immigrant (adjusted OR = 1.62; 95 % CI = 1.04-2.52) and living in a fishery area (adjusted OR = 1.57; 95 % CI = 1.04-2.52). Incorrect perceptions about the side-effects of DEC also obstructed DEC access for Myanmar immigrants. All positive LF antigenic immigrants reported visiting and emigrating from LF-endemic areas. Hospital-based DEC administration was an inappropriate approach to DEC delivery in areas with highly mobile Myanmar immigrants. Incorporating health-center personnel in DEC delivery twice yearly and improving the perceptions of DEC side effects would likely increase DEC coverage among Myanmar immigrants. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 19 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 29% |
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 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,850,641
of 22,870,727 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,940
of 14,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,510
of 274,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#192
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,870,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,915 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 274,343 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.