↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the Surveillance System for Spotted Fever in Brazil Using Machine-Learning Techniques

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Evaluating the Surveillance System for Spotted Fever in Brazil Using Machine-Learning Techniques
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00323
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diego Montenegro Lopez, Flávio Luis de Mello, Cristina Maria Giordano Dias, Paula Almeida, Milton Araújo, Monica Avelar Magalhães, Gilberto Salles Gazeta, Reginaldo Peçanha Brasil

Abstract

This work analyses the performance of the Brazilian spotted fever (SF) surveillance system in diagnosing and confirming suspected cases in the state of Rio de Janeiro (RJ), from 2007 to 2016 (July) using machine-learning techniques. Of the 890 cases reported to the Disease Notification Information System (SINAN), 11.7% were confirmed as SF, 2.9% as dengue, 1.6% as leptospirosis, and 0.7% as tick bite allergy, with the remainder being diagnosed as other categories (10.5%) or unspecified (72.7%). This study confirms the existence of obstacles in the diagnostic classification of suspected cases of SF by clinical signs and symptoms. Unlike man-capybara contact (1.7% of cases), man-tick contact (71.2%) represents an important risk indicator for SF. The analysis of decision trees highlights some clinical symptoms related to SF patient death or cure, such as: respiratory distress, convulsion, shock, petechiae, coma, icterus, and diarrhea. Moreover, cartographic techniques document patient transit between RJ and bordering states and within RJ itself. This work recommends some changes to SINAN that would provide a greater understanding of the dynamics of SF and serve as a model for other endemic areas in Brazil.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Librarian 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 14 26%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 20%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Mathematics 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 15 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,921,555
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,095
of 10,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,585
of 437,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#63
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 437,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.