↓ Skip to main content

Changing patterns of clinical malaria since 1965 among a tea estate population located in the Kenyan highlands

Overview of attention for article published in Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene, May 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Changing patterns of clinical malaria since 1965 among a tea estate population located in the Kenyan highlands
Published in
Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene, May 2000
DOI 10.1016/s0035-9203(00)90310-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

G.D. Shanks, K. Biomndo, S.I. Hay, R.W. Snow

Abstract

The changing epidemiology of clinical malaria since 1965 among hospitalized patients was studied at a group of tea estates in the western highlands of Kenya. These data indicate recent dramatic increases in the numbers of malaria admissions (6.5 to 32.5% of all admissions), case fatality (1.3 to 6%) and patients originating from low-risk, highland areas (34 to 59%). Climate change, environmental management, population migration, and breakdown in health service provision seem unlikely explanations for this changing disease pattern. The coincident arrival of chloroquine resistance during the late 1980s in the subregion suggests that drug resistance is a key factor in the current pattern and burden of malaria among this highland population.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Kenya 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 73 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 24%
Researcher 16 20%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Master 9 11%
Professor 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Environmental Science 8 10%
Mathematics 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 11 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 October 2017.
All research outputs
#2,864,123
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene
#188
of 4,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,446
of 40,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,008 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 40,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.