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 |
Targeting vivax malaria in the Asia Pacific: The Asia Pacific Malaria Elimination Network Vivax Working Group
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-015-0958-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
The Vivax Working Group |
| Abstract |
The Asia Pacific Malaria Elimination Network (APMEN) is a collaboration of 18 country partners committed to eliminating malaria from within their borders. Over the past 5 years, APMEN has helped to build the knowledge, tools and in-country technical expertise required to attain this goal. At its inaugural meeting in Brisbane in 2009, Plasmodium vivax infections were identified across the region as a common threat to this ambitious programme; the APMEN Vivax Working Group was established to tackle specifically this issue. The Working Group developed a four-stage strategy to identify knowledge gaps, build regional consensus on shared priorities, generate evidence and change practice to optimize malaria elimination activities. This case study describes the issues faced and the solutions found in developing this robust strategic partnership between national programmes and research partners within the Working Group. The success of the approach adopted by the group may facilitate similar applications in other regions seeking to deploy evidence-based policy and practice. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 17 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 39% |
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 14 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,451,339
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,525
of 5,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,707
of 387,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#83
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 387,568 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 147 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.