↓ Skip to main content

Using HIV Surveillance Laboratory Data to Identify Out-of-Care Patients

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Using HIV Surveillance Laboratory Data to Identify Out-of-Care Patients
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10461-017-1742-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Christian Hague, Betsey John, Linda Goldman, Kshema Nagavedu, Sophie Lewis, Rebecca Hawrusik, Serena Rajabiun, Noelle Cocoros, H. Dawn Fukuda, Kevin Cranston

Abstract

HIV-associated laboratory tests reported to public health surveillance have been used as a proxy measure of care engagement of HIV+ individuals. As part of a Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Special Projects of National Significance (SPNS) Initiative, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) worked with three pilot clinical facilities to identify HIV+ patients whose last HIV laboratory test occurred at the participating facility but who then appeared to be out of care, defined as an absence of HIV laboratory test results reported to MDPH for at least 6 months. The clinical facilities then reviewed medical records to determine whether these patients were actually not in care, or if there was another reason that they did not have a laboratory test performed, and provided feedback to MDPH on each of the presumed out-of-care patients. In the first year of the pilot project, 37% of patients who appeared to be out of care based on laboratory data were confirmed to be out of care after review of clinical health records. Of those patients who were confirmed to be out of care, 55% had a subsequent laboratory test within 3 months, and 72% had a laboratory test within 6 months, indicating that they had re-engaged with a care provider. MDPH found that it was essential to have clinical staff confirm the care status of patients who were presumed to be out of care based on surveillance data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 8 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 9 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,906,966
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,227
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,877
of 313,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#49
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 313,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.