↓ Skip to main content

Early morning urine collection to improve urinary lateral flow LAM assay sensitivity in hospitalised patients with HIV-TB co-infection

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Early morning urine collection to improve urinary lateral flow LAM assay sensitivity in hospitalised patients with HIV-TB co-infection
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2313-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Phindile Gina, Philippa J. Randall, Tapuwa E. Muchinga, Anil Pooran, Richard Meldau, Jonny G. Peter, Keertan Dheda

Abstract

Urine LAM testing has been approved by the WHO for use in hospitalised patients with advanced immunosuppression. However, sensitivity remains suboptimal. We therefore examined the incremental diagnostic sensitivity of early morning urine (EMU) versus random urine sampling using the Determine® lateral flow lipoarabinomannan assay (LF-LAM) in HIV-TB co-infected patients. Consenting HIV-infected inpatients, screened as part of a larger prospective randomized controlled trial, that were treated for TB, and could donate matched random and EMU samples were included. Thus paired sample were collected from the same patient, LF-LAM was graded using the pre-January 2014, with grade 1 and 2 manufacturer-designated cut-points (the latter designated grade 1 after January 2014). Single sputum Xpert-MTB/RIF and/or TB culture positivity served as the reference standard (definite TB). Those treated for TB but not meeting this standard were designated probable TB. 123 HIV-infected patients commenced anti-TB treatment and provided matched random and EMU samples. 33% (41/123) and 67% (82/123) had definite and probable TB, respectively. Amongst those with definite TB LF-LAM sensitivity (95%CI), using the grade 2 cut-point, increased from 12% (5-24; 5/43) to 39% (26-54; 16/41) with random versus EMU, respectively (p = 0.005). Similarly, amongst probable TB, LF-LAM sensitivity increased from 10% (5-17; 8/83) to 24% (16-34; 20/82) (p = 0.001). LF-LAM specificity was not determined. This proof of concept study indicates that EMU could improve the sensitivity of LF-LAM in hospitalised TB-HIV co-infected patients. These data have implications for clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 28%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 28 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,935,950
of 25,220,525 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#4,323
of 8,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,520
of 316,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#95
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,220,525 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 316,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.