↓ Skip to main content

Campanhas de vacinação antirrábica em cães e gatos e positividade para raiva em morcegos, no período de 2004 a 2014, em Campinas, São Paulo

Overview of attention for article published in Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Campanhas de vacinação antirrábica em cães e gatos e positividade para raiva em morcegos, no período de 2004 a 2014, em Campinas, São Paulo
Published in
Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde, July 2017
DOI 10.5123/s1679-49742017000300019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricardo Conde Alves Rodrigues, Andrea Paula Bruno von Zuben, Tosca de Lucca, Maria de Lourdes Aguiar Bonadia Reichmann, Ricardo Conde Alves Rodrigues, Andrea Paula Bruno von Zuben, Tosca de Lucca, Maria de Lourdes Aguiar Bonadia Reichmann

Abstract

to describe the results of rabies vaccination campaigns in dogs and cats from 2004 to 2009 and from 2012 to 2014, and the positivity for rabies in bats from 2004 to 2014, in Campinas-SP, Brazil. a descriptive study was carried out with secondary data from the Zoonoses Surveillance Unit. there was a marked reduction in the number of vaccinated dogs, from 105,764 (2004) to 65,561 (2014), with vaccine coverage below 80%, except in 2004; there was little oscillation in the number of vaccinated cats, from 10,212 (2004) to 9,522 (2014), with vaccine coverage below 80%, except in 2014; 4,464 bats were collected by passive surveillance, 2.17% of them were positive for rabies. the low vaccine coverage in dogs and cats and the circulation of the virus in bats imposes the need for improvement in surveillance actions, in order to prevent cases of human rabies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 33%
Student > Master 8 24%
Researcher 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 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 05 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,807,405
of 15,650,802 outputs
Outputs from Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde
#179
of 252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,594
of 280,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,650,802 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 252 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.