| Title |
Operational utility of the reverse-transcription recombinase polymerase amplification for detection of dengue virus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-018-3065-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kim-Kee Tan, Noor Syahida Azizan, Che Norainon Yaacob, Nurul Asma Anati Che Mat Seri, Nur Izyan Samsudin, Boon-Teong Teoh, Sing-Sin Sam, Sazaly AbuBakar |
| Abstract |
A method for rapid detection of dengue virus using the reverse-transcription recombinase polymerase amplification (RT-RPA) was recently developed, evaluated and made ready for deployment. However, reliance solely on the evaluation performed by experienced researchers in a well-structured and well-equipped reference laboratory may overlook the potential intrinsic problems that may arise during deployment of the assay into new application sites, especially for users unfamiliar with the test. Appropriate assessment of this newly developed assay by users who are unfamiliar with the assay is, therefore, vital. An operational utility test to elucidate the efficiency and effectiveness of the dengue RT-RPA assay was conducted among a group of researchers new to the assay. Nineteen volunteer researchers with different research experience were recruited. The participants performed the RT-RPA assay and interpreted the test results according to the protocol provided. Deviation from the protocol was identified and tabulated by trained facilitators. Post-test questionnaires were conducted to determine the user satisfaction and acceptability of the dengue RT-RPA assay. All the participants completed the test and successfully interpreted the results according to the provided instructions, regardless of their research experience. Of the 19 participants, three (15.8%) performed the assay with no deviations and 16 (84.2%) performed the assay with only 1 to 5 deviations. The number of deviations from protocol, however, was not correlated with the user laboratory experience. The accuracy of the results was also not affected by user laboratory experience. The concordance of the assay results against that of the expected was at 89.3%. The user satisfaction towards the RT-RPA protocol and interpretation of results was 90% and 100%, respectively. The dengue RT-RPA assay can be successfully performed by simply following the provided written instructions. Deviations from the written protocols did not adversely affect the outcome of the assay. These suggest that the RT-RPA assay is indeed a simple, robust and efficient laboratory method for detection of dengue virus. Furthermore, high new user acceptance of the RT-RPA assay suggests that this assay could be successfully deployed into new laboratories where RT-RPA was not previously performed. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 33% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 40% |
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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,387,654
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,840
of 7,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,842
of 329,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#59
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 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 7,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 329,169 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 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.