| Title |
Interim Guidance for Zika Virus Testing of Urine - United States, 2016.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.15585/mmwr.mm6518e1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Abstract |
Diagnostic testing for Zika virus infection can be accomplished using molecular and serologic methods. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) is the preferred test for Zika virus infection because it can be performed rapidly and is highly specific (1,2). However, in most patients, Zika virus RNA is unlikely to be detected in serum after the first week of illness (2,3). Recent reports using adaptations of previously published methods (2,4) suggest that Zika virus RNA can be detected in urine for at least 2 weeks after onset of symptoms (3,5-7). Currently, the CDC Trioplex rRT-PCR assay is the only diagnostic tool authorized by the Food and Drug Administration for Zika virus testing of urine (1). Other laboratory-developed tests will need in-house validations to adequately characterize the performance of the assay and meet Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments requirements. Further investigation is needed to determine the sensitivity and utility of Zika virus rRT-PCR on urine specimens collected ≥14 days after onset of symptoms. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 176 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 87 | 49% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 4 | 2% |
| Japan | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Lebanon | 1 | <1% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | <1% |
| Trinidad and Tobago | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 56 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 122 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 34 | 19% |
| Scientists | 12 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 8 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 64 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 362. 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 09 February 2020.
All research outputs
#89,371
of 25,656,290 outputs
Outputs from MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report
#755
of 4,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,799
of 327,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from MMWR: Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report
#8
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,656,290 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,269 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 333.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 327,978 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.