↓ Skip to main content

Mapping Helminth Co-Infection and Co-Intensity: Geostatistical Prediction in Ghana

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, June 2011
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

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Mapping Helminth Co-Infection and Co-Intensity: Geostatistical Prediction in Ghana
Published in
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, June 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricardo J. Soares Magalhães, Nana-Kwadwo Biritwum, John O. Gyapong, Simon Brooker, Yaobi Zhang, Lynsey Blair, Alan Fenwick, Archie C. A. Clements

Abstract

Morbidity due to Schistosoma haematobium and hookworm infections is marked in those with intense co-infections by these parasites. The development of a spatial predictive decision-support tool is crucial for targeting the delivery of integrated mass drug administration (MDA) to those most in need. We investigated the co-distribution of S. haematobium and hookworm infection, plus the spatial overlap of infection intensity of both parasites, in Ghana. The aim was to produce maps to assist the planning and evaluation of national parasitic disease control programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 155 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 17%
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Professor 9 5%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 32 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 20%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Other 35 21%
Unknown 41 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 29 January 2024.
All research outputs
#6,374,203
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#3,658
of 9,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,631
of 123,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#34
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,377 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 123,943 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 89 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.