↓ Skip to main content

Mosquito larval source management for controlling malaria

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
321 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
Mosquito larval source management for controlling malaria
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008923.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy S Tusting, Julie Thwing, David Sinclair, Ulrike Fillinger, John Gimnig, Kimberly E Bonner, Christian Bottomley, Steven W Lindsay

Abstract

Malaria is an important cause of illness and death in people living in many parts of the world, especially sub-Saharan Africa. Long-lasting insecticide treated bed nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) reduce malaria transmission by targeting the adult mosquito vector and are key components of malaria control programmes. However, mosquito numbers may also be reduced by larval source management (LSM), which targets mosquito larvae as they mature in aquatic habitats. This is conducted by permanently or temporarily reducing the availability of larval habitats (habitat modification and habitat manipulation), or by adding substances to standing water that either kill or inhibit the development of larvae (larviciding).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
United States 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 307 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 64 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 18%
Student > Master 56 17%
Student > Bachelor 43 13%
Student > Postgraduate 26 8%
Other 45 14%
Unknown 30 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 82 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 76 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 8%
Environmental Science 22 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 6%
Other 51 16%
Unknown 46 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#175,063
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#429
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,440
of 155,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
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 155,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.