↓ Skip to main content

Endemias rurais, saúde e desenvolvimento: Emmanuel Dias e a construção de uma rede de aliados contra a doença de Chagas

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

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Endemias rurais, saúde e desenvolvimento: Emmanuel Dias e a construção de uma rede de aliados contra a doença de Chagas
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, November 2016
DOI 10.1590/1413-812320152111.00612016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simone Petraglia Kropf

Abstract

The scope of this article is to analyze the trajectory of Emmanuel Dias (1908-1962), a researcher at the Oswaldo Cruz Institute (OCI) and director of the Center for Studies and Prophylaxis of Chagas Disease (OCI outpost established in 1943 in the city of Bambuí, Minas Gerais), as a key actor in the acknowledgement of Chagas disease as a public health problem in Brazil and the Americas. It seeks to show that the conquest of this acknowledgement, the cornerstone of which was the staging of the first campaign to combat the disease in Brazil in 1950, was made possible by the intense political mobilization of Dias together with the various social groups, such as physicians, politicians and residents of rural areas, public health officials, governments and international organizations. This mobilization occurred during the 1940s and 1950s in a historical context marked by intense debate about the relationship between health and development and helped to construct a network of alliances that was critical for the recognition of Chagas disease as a chronic cardiopathy, which threatened the productivity of rural workers and represented a medical and social problem that merited public health actions and programs geared to get it under control.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 27%
Student > Bachelor 4 27%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 27%

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 19 November 2017.
All research outputs
#10,030,593
of 12,536,156 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#441
of 505 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,910
of 283,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#8
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,536,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 505 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 283,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.