↓ Skip to main content

Identifying the social and environmental determinants of plague endemicity in Peru: insights from a case study in Ascope, La Libertad

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2018
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)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
Title
Identifying the social and environmental determinants of plague endemicity in Peru: insights from a case study in Ascope, La Libertad
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5062-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Rivière-Cinnamond, Alain Santandreu, Anita Luján, Frederic Mertens, John Omar Espinoza, Yesenia Carpio, Johnny Bravo, Jean-Marc Gabastou

Abstract

Plague remains a public health problem in specific areas located in Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador and Peru. Its prevention and control encompasses adequate clinical management and timely laboratory diagnosis. However, understanding communities' interaction with its surrounding ecosystem as well as the differences between community members and institutional stakeholders regarding the root causes of plague might contribute to understand its endemicity. We aim at bridging the traditionally separate biological and social sciences by elucidating communities' risk perception and identifying knowledge gaps between communities and stakeholders. This approach has been used in other areas but never in understanding plague endemicity, nor applied in the Latin American plague context. The objectives were to identify (i) plague risk perception at community level, (ii) perceived social and environmental determinants of plague endemicity, and (iii) institutions that need to be involved and actions needed to be taken as proposed by stakeholders and community members. The study was performed in 2015 and took place in Ascope rural province, La Libertad Region, in Peru, where the study areas are surrounded by intensive private sugarcane production. We propose using a multi-level discourse analysis. Community households were randomly selected (n = 68). Structured and semi-structured questionnaires were applied. A stakeholder analysis was used to identify policy makers (n = 34). In-depth interviews were performed, recorded and transcribed. Descriptive variables were analyzed with SPSS®. Answers were coded following variables adapted from the Commission on Social Determinants of Health and analyzed with the assistance of ATLAS.ti®. Results showed that risk perception was low within the community. Policy-makers identified agriculture and sugarcane production as the root cause while community answers ranked the hygiene situation as the main cause. Stakeholders first ranked governmental sectors (education, housing, agriculture and transport) and the community prioritized the health sector. Social surveillance and improving prevention and control were first cited by policy-makers and community members, respectively. The determinants of plague endemicity identified by the two groups differed. Similarly, actions and sectors needed to be involved in solving the problem varied. The gaps in understanding plague root causes between these two groups might hinder the efficiency of current plague prevention and control strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 8 7%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 43 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 12%
Psychology 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 48 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,029,710
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,459
of 14,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,084
of 437,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#136
of 276 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,997 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 69% 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 437,329 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 276 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.