↓ Skip to main content

Successes and failures of sixty years of vector control in French Guiana: what is the next step?

Overview of attention for article published in Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, March 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 (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Successes and failures of sixty years of vector control in French Guiana: what is the next step?
Published in
Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, March 2018
DOI 10.1590/0074-02760170398
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanouk Epelboin, Sarah C Chaney, Amandine Guidez, Nausicaa Habchi-Hanriot, Stanislas Talaga, Lanjiao Wang, Isabelle Dusfour

Abstract

Since the 1940s, French Guiana has implemented vector control to contain or eliminate malaria, yellow fever, and, recently, dengue, chikungunya, and Zika. Over time, strategies have evolved depending on the location, efficacy of the methods, development of insecticide resistance, and advances in vector control techniques. This review summarises the history of vector control in French Guiana by reporting the records found in the private archives of the Institute Pasteur in French Guiana and those accessible in libraries worldwide. This publication highlights successes and failures in vector control and identifies the constraints and expectations for vector control in this French overseas territory in the Americas.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 18 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 20 27%
Unknown 21 28%
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 21 September 2023.
All research outputs
#4,687,422
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#125
of 1,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,449
of 350,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
#2
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,502 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 350,562 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.