↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review on malaria sero-epidemiology studies in the Brazilian Amazon: insights into immunological markers for exposure and protection

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
A systematic review on malaria sero-epidemiology studies in the Brazilian Amazon: insights into immunological markers for exposure and protection
Published in
Malaria Journal, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12936-017-1762-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro M. Folegatti, André M. Siqueira, Wuelton M. Monteiro, Marcus Vinícius G. Lacerda, Chris J. Drakeley, Érika M. Braga

Abstract

Considerable success in reducing malaria incidence and mortality has been achieved in Brazil, leading to discussions over the possibility of moving towards elimination. However, more than reporting and counting clinical cases, elimination will require the use of efficient tools and strategies for measuring transmission dynamics and detecting the infectious reservoir as the primary indicators of interest for surveillance and evaluation. Because acquisition and maintenance of anti-malarial antibodies depend on parasite exposure, seroprevalence rates could be used as a reliable tool for assessing malaria endemicity and an adjunct measure for monitoring transmission in a rapid and cost-effective manner. This systematic review synthesizes the existing literature on seroprevalence of malaria in the Brazilian Amazon Basin. Different study designs (cross-sectional surveys and longitudinal studies) with reported serological results in well-defined Brazilian populations were considered. Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE and LILACS databases were screened and the articles were included per established selection criteria. Data extraction was performed by two authors and a modified critical appraisal tool was applied to assess the quality and completeness of cross-sectional studies regarding defined variables of interest. From 220 single records identified, 23 studies were included in this systematic review for the qualitative synthesis. Five studies reported serology results on Plasmodium falciparum, 14 papers assessed Plasmodium vivax and four articles reported results on both Plasmodium species. Considerable heterogeneity among the evaluated malarial antigens, including sporozoite and blood stage antigens, was observed. The majority of recent studies analysed IgG responses against P. vivax antigens reflecting the species distribution pattern in Brazil over the last decades. Most of the published papers were cross-sectional surveys (73.9%) and only six cohort studies were included in this review. Three studies pointed to an association between antibodies against circumsporozoite protein of both P. falciparum and P. vivax and malaria exposure. Furthermore, five out 13 cross-sectional studies evidenced a positive association between IgG antibodies to the conserved 19-kDa C-terminal region of the merozoite surface protein 1 of P. vivax (PvMSP119) and malaria exposure. This systematic review identifies potential biomarkers of P. falciparum and P. vivax exposure in areas with variable and unstable malaria transmission in Brazil. However, this study highlights the need for standardization of further studies to provide an ideal monitoring tool to evaluate trends in malaria transmission and the effectiveness of malaria intervention programmes in Brazil. Moreover, the score-based weighted tool developed and used in this study still requires further validation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Bachelor 14 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Professor 6 7%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 14 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 16 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,894,290
of 9,663,529 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#2,081
of 3,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,776
of 254,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#87
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,663,529 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,265 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 254,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.