↓ Skip to main content

State of Affairs of Tuberculosis in Prison Facilities: A Systematic Review of Screening Practices and Recommendations for Best TB Control

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
52 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.
Title
State of Affairs of Tuberculosis in Prison Facilities: A Systematic Review of Screening Practices and Recommendations for Best TB Control
Published in
PLoS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0053644
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie V. S. Vinkeles Melchers, Sabine L. van Elsland, Joep M. A. Lange, Martien W. Borgdorff, Jan van den Hombergh

Abstract

Prisoners are at high risk of developing tuberculosis (TB), causing morbidity and mortality. Prison facilities encounter many challenges in TB screening procedures and TB control. This review explores screening practices for detection of TB and describes limitations of TB control in prison facilities worldwide.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 50 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Unspecified 5 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 23 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 19%
Unspecified 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 23 44%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,519,063
of 11,477,928 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#24,936
of 127,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,195
of 312,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#1,141
of 6,548 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,477,928 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 312,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,548 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.