| Title |
Costs and cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions - a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2875-10-337 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael T White, Lesong Conteh, Richard Cibulskis, Azra C Ghani |
| Abstract |
The control and elimination of malaria requires expanded coverage of and access to effective malaria control interventions such as insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), indoor residual spraying (IRS), intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), diagnostic testing and appropriate treatment. Decisions on how to scale up the coverage of these interventions need to be based on evidence of programme effectiveness, equity and cost-effectiveness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 31% |
| Nigeria | 2 | 15% |
| Jordan | 1 | 8% |
| Ghana | 1 | 8% |
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| Sweden | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 580 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Vietnam | 1 | <1% |
| Lithuania | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Senegal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 567 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 146 | 25% |
| Researcher | 99 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 56 | 10% |
| Other | 40 | 7% |
| Other | 93 | 16% |
| Unknown | 88 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 155 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 84 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 50 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 32 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 30 | 5% |
| Other | 117 | 20% |
| Unknown | 112 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 02 May 2023.
All research outputs
#964,492
of 25,508,813 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#115
of 5,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,982
of 154,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#3
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,508,813 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,939 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 98% 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 154,015 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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 96% of its contemporaries.