↓ Skip to main content

Entomological and parasitological impacts of indoor residual spraying with DDT, alphacypermethrin and deltamethrin in the western foothill area of Madagascar

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Entomological and parasitological impacts of indoor residual spraying with DDT, alphacypermethrin and deltamethrin in the western foothill area of Madagascar
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-13-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jocelyn Ratovonjato, Milijaona Randrianarivelojosia, Maroafy E Rakotondrainibe, Vaomalala Raharimanga, Lala Andrianaivolambo, Gilbert Le Goff, Christophe Rogier, Frédéric Ariey, Sébastien Boyer, Vincent Robert

Abstract

In Madagascar, indoor residual spraying (IRS) with insecticide was part of the national malaria control programme since the middle of the twentieth century. It was mainly employed in the highlands and the foothill areas, which are prone to malaria epidemics. Prior to a policy change foreseeing a shift from DDT to pyrethroids, a study was carried out to assess the entomological and parasitological impacts of IRS in areas with DDT or pyrethroids and in areas without IRS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Madagascar 5 7%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 63 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 31%
Student > Master 16 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 17%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Environmental Science 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 7 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 June 2014.
All research outputs
#3,489,810
of 14,130,514 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,024
of 4,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,435
of 245,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#24
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,130,514 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 245,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.