| Title |
Utility of a brief computerized battery to assess HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment in a resource-limited setting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of NeuroVirology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13365-016-0456-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nirupama Yechoor, Sheri L. Towe, Kevin R. Robertson, Daniel Westreich, Noeline Nakasujja, Christina S. Meade |
| Abstract |
Despite the persistently high prevalence of neurocognitive impairment in HIV-positive patients, routine HIV care in many resource-limited settings does not include neuropsychological assessment. The objective of this study was to examine the utility of a brief computerized battery for identifying neurocognitive impairment in a busy HIV clinic in Uganda. Specifically, we compared performance on a gold standard neuropsychological exam to that on the CogState Brief Battery. In this cross-sectional study, 181 HIV-positive patients completed both assessment batteries in a randomized order. The primary outcome measures were neurocognitive impairment on the standard exam defined by the global deficit score and cumulative performance on the CogState Brief Battery. Sixty-nine participants (38 %) were classified as impaired on the standard neuropsychological exam, and participants who were classified as impaired performed significantly worse on CogState compared to those who were unimpaired (p < 0.001). CogState had adequate specificity but low sensitivity, suggesting that it may not be a clinically useful screening tool to identify patients who likely have neurocognitive impairment in Uganda. This study supports the feasibility of using a computerized battery for assessing neurocognitive impairment in HIV-positive patients in resource-limited settings, but additional research is needed to identify screening tools with higher sensitivity for use in HIV clinics. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Researcher | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 17 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Psychology | 6 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 38% |
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 31 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,461,618
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroVirology
#657
of 928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,573
of 338,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroVirology
#12
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 928 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 338,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.