↓ Skip to main content

Study of mortality from infectious diseases in Brazil from 2005 to 2010: risks involved in handling corpses

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Study of mortality from infectious diseases in Brazil from 2005 to 2010: risks involved in handling corpses
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, February 2016
DOI 10.1590/1413-81232015212.12652014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Telma Abdalla de Oliveira Cardoso, Duarte Nuno Vieira

Abstract

In the wake of disasters, the lack of information on how to handle and dispose of corpses leads the professionals involved in emergency operations to uncertainty about associated risks and safety precautions. The article seeks to establish the risks of the etiologic agents involved in Brazilian mortality due to infectious diseases and identify and discuss the main protection measures for professionals involved in handling of corpses in disaster situations. It involved a survey of deaths by infectious diseases in Brazil between 2005 and 2010, using data from the Mortality Information System. Of the 171,223 deaths analyzed, the pathogens leading to the greatest number of deaths were: HIV, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Trypanosoma cruzi. 59% belonged to risk class 3 and 40.6% to risk class 2. Eight deaths were caused by risk class 4 pathogens, which represent high risk. The professionals involved in the handling of corpses may be exposed to chronic risks, such as viruses transmitted via blood, gastrointestinal infections and tuberculosis. These findings indicate the importance of investment in the preparation of measures to reduce the risk of infection associated with the handling of corpses.

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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#1,121
of 2,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,070
of 406,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#21
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 406,424 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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.