You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Zika detection: comparison of methodologies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.04.011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tatiana Elias Colombo, Ana Carolina Bernardes Terzian, João Pessoa Araújo Júnior, Ricardo Parreira, Eliana Márcia Sotello Cabrera, Izalco Nuremberg Penha dos Santos, Andréia Francesli Negri Reis, Fabiana Rodrigues Costa, Lilian Elisa Arão Antônio Cruz, Patrícia Lopes Rombola, Maurício Lacerda Nogueira |
| Abstract |
Many countries in the Americas have detected local transmission of multiple arboviruses that cause febrile illnesses. Therefore, laboratory testing has become an important tool for confirming the etiology of these diseases. The present study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of three different Zika virus detection assays. One hundred serum samples from patients presenting with acute febrile symptoms were tested using a previously reported TaqMan(®) RT-qPCR assay. We used a SYBR(®) Green RT-qPCR and a conventional PCR methodologies to compare the results. Of the samples that were determined to be negative by the TaqMan(®) RT-qPCR assay, 100% (Kappa=0.670) were also found to be negative by SYBR(®) Green RT-qPCR based on Tm comparison; however, 14% (Kappa=0.035) were found to be positive by conventional PCR followed by agarose gel electrophoresis. The differences between the ZIKV strains circulating worldwide and the low viremia period can compromise diagnostic accuracy and thereby the accuracy of outbreak data. Therefore, improved assays are required to improve the diagnosis and surveillance of arbovirus. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 110 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 20% |
| Unknown | 27 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 16 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 31 | 28% |
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 21 September 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#1,047
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,977
of 323,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#21
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. 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 323,499 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 23 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.