↓ Skip to main content

Airflow attenuation and bed net utilization: observations from Africa and Asia

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, June 2012
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Airflow attenuation and bed net utilization: observations from Africa and Asia
Published in
Malaria Journal, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-11-200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorenz von Seidlein, Konstantin Ikonomidis, Rasmus Bruun, Musa Jawara, Margaret Pinder, Bart GJ Knols, Jakob B Knudsen

Abstract

Qualitative studies suggest that bed nets affect the thermal comfort of users. To understand and reduce this discomfort the effect of bed nets on temperature, humidity, and airflow was measured in rural homes in Asia and Africa, as well as in an experimental wind tunnel. Two investigators with architectural training selected 60 houses in The Gambia, Tanzania, Philippines, and Thailand. Data-loggers were used to measure indoor temperatures in hourly intervals over a 12 months period. In a subgroup of 20 houses airflow, temperature and humidity were measured at five-minute intervals for one night from 21.00 to 6.00 hrs inside and outside of bed nets using sensors and omni-directional thermo-anemometers. An investigator set up a bed net with a mesh size of 220 holes per inch 2 in each study household and slept under the bed net to simulate a realistic environment. The attenuation of airflow caused by bed nets of different mesh sizes was also measured in an experimental wind tunnel.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 3%
Philippines 1 3%
Bangladesh 1 3%
Unknown 36 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 45%
Student > Master 8 20%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 23%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Other 10 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 January 2014.
All research outputs
#1,384,417
of 7,779,875 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#510
of 2,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,895
of 92,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#8
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,779,875 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,680 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 92,882 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.