↓ Skip to main content

Organ donor screening practices for Strongyloides stercoralis infection among US organ procurement organizations

Overview of attention for article published in Transplant Infectious Disease, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Organ donor screening practices for Strongyloides stercoralis infection among US organ procurement organizations
Published in
Transplant Infectious Disease, March 2018
DOI 10.1111/tid.12865
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Targeted donor screening for strongyloidiasis performed at the time of organ procurement can prevent this life-threatening donor-derived infection. The Association of Organ Procurement Organizations surveyed members to determine the number of US organ procurement organizations (OPOs) performing donor screening for Strongyloides infection and their screening practices. All 58 OPOs responded to the survey. Only 6 (10%) currently screen donors for strongyloidiasis; most OPOs started 6-36 months before the survey and one started 6 years prior. All used risk-based criteria to determine which donors to screen, though the criteria varied among OPOs. A median of 56 donors have been screened at each OPO since initiating their screening programs, with a median of 2 infected donors (range 0-13) identified. Overall, 53 organs have been transplanted from 22 infected donors, including hearts, lungs, kidneys, and livers. Of 52 OPOs not currently screening, 20 had considered screening and one plans to start screening in the near future. Of those considering risk-based screening, most had not decided on the criteria. Uncertainty about the benefits of and guidelines for screening and misconceptions about the interpretation of test results were concerns shared by non-screening OPOs. Continued education and advocacy on the importance of targeted donor screening are needed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 November 2018.
All research outputs
#11,552,073
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Transplant Infectious Disease
#782
of 1,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,533
of 369,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transplant Infectious Disease
#18
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,840 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 369,540 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 55% of its contemporaries.