↓ Skip to main content

Re-examining environmental correlates of Plasmodium falciparum malaria endemicity: a data-intensive variable selection approach

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, February 2015
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 (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Re-examining environmental correlates of Plasmodium falciparum malaria endemicity: a data-intensive variable selection approach
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0574-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel J Weiss, Bonnie Mappin, Ursula Dalrymple, Samir Bhatt, Ewan Cameron, Simon I Hay, Peter W Gething

Abstract

Malaria risk maps play an increasingly important role in disease control planning, implementation, and evaluation. The construction of these maps using modern geospatial techniques relies on covariate grids: continuous surfaces quantifying environmental factors that partially explain spatial heterogeneity in malaria endemicity. Although crucial, past variable selection processes for this purpose have often been subjective and ad-hoc, with many covariates used in modeling with little quantitative justification. This research consists of an extensive covariate construction and selection process for predicting Plasmodium falciparum parasite rates (PfPR) in Africa for years 2000-2012. First, a literature review was conducted to establish a comprehensive list of covariates used for malaria mapping. Second, a library of covariate data was assembled to reflect this list, a process that included the construction of multiple, temporally dynamic datasets. Third, the resulting set of covariates was leveraged to create more than 50 million possible covariate terms via factorial combinations of different spatial and temporal aggregations, transformations, and pairwise interactions. Fourth, the expanded set of covariates was reduced via successive selection criteria to yield a robust covariate subset that was assessed using an out-of-sample validation approach. The final covariate subset included predominately dynamic covariates and it substantially out-performed earlier sets used by the Malaria Atlas Project (MAP) for creating global malaria risk maps, with the pseudo-R(2) value for the out-of-sample validation increasing from 0.43 to 0.52. Dynamic covariates improved the model, with 17 of the 20 new covariates consisting of monthly or annual products, but the selected covariates were typically interaction terms that included both dynamic and synoptic datasets. Thus the interplay between normal (i.e., long-term averages) and immediate conditions may be key for characterizing environmental controls on parasite rate. This analysis represents the first effort to systematically audit covariate utility for malaria mapping and then derive an objective, empirically based set of environmental covariates for modeling PfPR. The new covariates produce more reliable representations of malaria risk patterns and how they are changing through time, and these covariates will be used to characterize spatially and temporally varying environmental conditions affecting PfPR within a geostatistical-modeling framework, thus building upon previous research by MAP that produced global malaria maps for 2007 and 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Vietnam 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 139 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 20%
Student > Master 28 19%
Researcher 26 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 26 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 15%
Environmental Science 8 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Computer Science 7 5%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 39 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 30 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,473,276
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#247
of 5,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,741
of 356,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#4
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. 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 356,249 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 106 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 97% of its contemporaries.