↓ Skip to main content

Análise espacial de dados de contagem com excesso de zeros aplicado ao estudo da incidência de dengue em Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Análise espacial de dados de contagem com excesso de zeros aplicado ao estudo da incidência de dengue em Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2016
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00036915
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Vilton Costa, Liciana Vaz de Arruda Silveira, Maria Rita Donalísio

Abstract

Dengue incidence occurs predominantly within city limits. Identifying spatial distribution of the disease at the local level helps formulate strategies to control and prevent the disease. Spatial analysis of counting data for small areas commonly violates the assumptions of traditional Poisson models due to the excessive amount of zeros. This study compared the performance of four counting models used in mapping diseases: Poisson, negative binomial, zero-inflated Poisson, and zero-inflated negative binomial. The methods were compared in a simulation study. The models analyzed in the simulation were applied to a spatial ecological study of dengue data aggregated by census tracts in the city of Campinas, São Paulo State, Brazil, 2007. Spatial analysis was conducted with Bayesian hierarchical models. The zero-inflated Poisson model showed the best performance for estimating relative risk of dengue incidence in the census tracts.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Professor 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 32%
Environmental Science 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 2 11%
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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,565
of 1,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#336,908
of 378,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#24
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,855 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 378,571 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.