↓ Skip to main content

Estimation of delay to diagnosis and incidence in HIV using indirect evidence of infection dates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Estimation of delay to diagnosis and incidence in HIV using indirect evidence of infection dates
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12874-018-0522-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oliver T. Stirrup, David T. Dunn

Abstract

Minimisation of the delay to diagnosis is critical to achieving optimal outcomes for HIV patients and to limiting the potential for further onward infections. However, investigation of diagnosis delay is hampered by the fact that in most newly diagnosed patients the exact timing of infection cannot be determined and so inferences must be drawn from biomarker data. We develop a Bayesian statistical model to evaluate delay-to-diagnosis distributions in HIV patients without known infection date, based on viral sequence genetic diversity and longitudinal viral load and CD4 count data. The delay to diagnosis is treated as a random variable for each patient and their biomarker data are modelled relative to the true time elapsed since infection, with this dependence used to obtain a posterior distribution for the delay to diagnosis. Data from a national seroconverter cohort with infection date known to within ± 6 months, linked to a database of viral sequences, are used to calibrate the model parameters. An exponential survival model is implemented that allows general inferences regarding diagnosis delay and pooling of information across groups of patients. If diagnoses are only observed within a given window period, then it is necessary to also model incidence as a function of time; we suggest a pragmatic approach to this problem when dealing with data from an established epidemic. The model developed is used to investigate delay-to-diagnosis distributions in men who have sex with men diagnosed with HIV in London in the period 2009-2013 with unknown date of infection. Cross-validation and simulation analyses indicate that the models developed provide more accurate information regarding the timing of infection than does CD4 count-based estimation. Delay-to-diagnosis distributions were estimated in the London cohort, and substantial differences were observed according to ethnicity. The combination of all available biomarker data with pooled estimation of the distribution of diagnosis-delays allows for more precise prediction of the true timing of infection in individual patients, and the models developed also provide useful population-level information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 15%
Unspecified 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Mathematics 3 9%
Unspecified 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 14 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,137,356
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#679
of 2,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,264
of 329,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#28
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 329,163 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.