↓ Skip to main content

Defining the Geographical Range of the Plasmodium knowlesi Reservoir

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Defining the Geographical Range of the Plasmodium knowlesi Reservoir
Published in
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002780
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine L. Moyes, Andrew J. Henry, Nick Golding, Zhi Huang, Balbir Singh, J. Kevin Baird, Paul N. Newton, Michael Huffman, Kirsten A. Duda, Chris J. Drakeley, Iqbal R. F. Elyazar, Nicholas M. Anstey, Qijun Chen, Zinta Zommers, Samir Bhatt, Peter W. Gething, Simon I. Hay

Abstract

The simian malaria parasite, Plasmodium knowlesi, can cause severe and fatal disease in humans yet it is rarely included in routine public health reporting systems for malaria and its geographical range is largely unknown. Because malaria caused by P. knowlesi is a truly neglected tropical disease, there are substantial obstacles to defining the geographical extent and risk of this disease. Information is required on the occurrence of human cases in different locations, on which non-human primates host this parasite and on which vectors are able to transmit it to humans. We undertook a systematic review and ranked the existing evidence, at a subnational spatial scale, to investigate the potential geographical range of the parasite reservoir capable of infecting humans.

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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
India 2 1%
Italy 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Unknown 155 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 15%
Researcher 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Student > Postgraduate 13 8%
Other 35 21%
Unknown 15 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 37%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 7%
Environmental Science 9 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 4%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 17 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 March 2014.
All research outputs
#4,368,117
of 14,704,030 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#3,356
of 6,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,172
of 189,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
#66
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,704,030 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 189,478 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.