| Title |
Fecal Coliform Bacterial Detection to Assess Enema Adherence in HIV Prevention Clinical Studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-018-2211-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wutyi S. Aung, Rahul P. Bakshi, Jennifer Breakey, James E. Johnson, Craig W. Hendrix, Ethel Weld, Edward J. Fuchs, Mark A. Marzinke |
| Abstract |
Evaluating the efficacy of any HIV prevention strategy is dependent on ensuring and objectively monitoring adherence to the intervention. Medicated rectal enemas are a potential method for providing topical, episodic HIV prophylaxis during receptive anal intercourse. Assessing adherence to recommended enema dosing regimens is essential in evaluating the utility of this strategy. We utilized fecal coliform bacteria on used enema tips as a marker for enema use. Enema tip coliforms were tested by repurposing a microtiter plate-based water quality test designed to detect fecal contamination of water. Coliform detection occurred with 100% sensitivity and specificity when tips were assayed on day of use. The assay performed well post-7 day sample storage at room temperature, yielding a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 93%. All (n = 64) samples collected in a subset of the DREAM-01 rectal microbicide enema clinical trial tested positive, even when tips were evaluated > 7 days post-reported use. The coliform-based enema tip assay allows monitoring of adherence in interventions involving rectal enemas in a sensitive, specific and inexpensive manner. The test performs well in clinical trial settings. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 4 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 48% |
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 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#3,266
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,604
of 329,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#76
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 329,728 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.