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 |
Studies on the sand fly fauna (Diptera: Psychodidae) in high-transmission areas of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the Republic of Suriname
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-3305-6-318 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alida D Kent, Thiago V Dos Santos, Anielkoemar Gangadin, Ashok Samjhawan, Dennis R A Mans, Henk D F H Schallig |
| Abstract |
Sand flies (Diptera: Psychodidae) are the vectors of Leishmania parasites, the causative agents of leishmaniasis. Cutaneous leishmaniasis is an increasing public health problem in the Republic of Suriname and is mainly caused by Leishmania (Vianna) guyanensis, but L. (V.) braziliensis, L. (L.) amazonensis, and L. (V.) naiffi also infect humans. Transmission occurs predominantly in the forested hinterland of the country. Information regarding the potential vectors of leishmaniasis in Suriname is limited. This study aims to broaden the knowledge about vectors involved in the transmission of cutaneous leishmaniasis in Suriname. For this purpose, sand flies were characterized in various foci of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the country, the districts of Para, Brokopondo, and Sipaliwini. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 15% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 13% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
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 11 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,284,663
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#3,365
of 5,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,952
of 214,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#29
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 214,638 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.