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 |
Métodos e procedimentos usados no controle do Aedes aegypti na bem-sucedida campanha de profilaxia da febre amarela de 1928 e 1929 no Rio de Janeiro
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.5123/s1679-49742016000400017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eduardo Dias Wermelinger, Raimundo Wilson de Carvalho, Eduardo Dias Wermelinger, Raimundo Wilson de Carvalho |
| Abstract |
to review the challenges and procedures used in Aedes aegypti control and the characteristics of the epidemics in the successful campaign, led by Clementino Fraga, for yellow fever control in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1928 and 1929, before the vaccine (1937) and DDT (1947). a literature review was conducted by searching official reports, scientific journals and historic textbooks on this subject. the A. aegypti control was achieved through the hard and organized work of breeding site police teams, priority in eliminating breeding sites through environmental management measures and a qualified training program for the teams. the reports demonstrate a set of simple but laborious procedures that could effectively control mosquitoes in urban environment through the work of the teams, who were committed to environmental management measures, aiming at eliminating breeding sites and were capable of handling social and environmental obstacles. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
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 08 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde
#200
of 411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,521
of 332,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde
#6
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 411 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 332,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.