↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions and recommendations by scientists for a potential release of genetically modified mosquitoes in Nigeria

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Perceptions and recommendations by scientists for a potential release of genetically modified mosquitoes in Nigeria
Published in
Malaria Journal, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-13-154
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia N Okorie, John M Marshall, Onoja M Akpa, Olusegun G Ademowo

Abstract

The use of genetically modified mosquitoes (GMMs) for the control of malaria and other mosquito-borne diseases has been proposed in malaria-endemic countries, such as Nigeria, which has the largest burden in Africa. Scientists are major stakeholders whose opinions and perceptions can adversely affect the success of the trials of GMMs if they are not involved early. Unfortunately, information on the awareness of Nigerians scientists and their overall perception of the GMMs is practically non-existent in the literature. Therefore, this study aimed at understanding how receptive Nigerian scientists are to a potential release of GMMs for the control of malaria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 24%
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Other 20 24%
Unknown 13 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,407,924
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#229
of 5,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,886
of 232,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#6
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 232,015 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 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 95% of its contemporaries.