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 |
Performance comparison of CareStart™ HRP2/pLDH combo rapid malaria test with light microscopy in north-western Tigray, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-017-2503-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Getacher Feleke, Shambel Tarko, Haftom Hadush |
| Abstract |
Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are alternative methods for microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria in resource limited settings. Among commercially available RDTs, CareStart™ Malaria test was found to show reliable results. This study evaluated the performance of CareStart™ Malaria Combo test kit in Northwestern Tigray in Ethiopia. Blood samples were collected from 320 malaria-suspected patients at Mayani Hospital in Northwestern Tigray from December 2015 to March 2016. All blood samples were examined using both light microscopy and CareStart™ Malaria HRP2/pLDH Combo Test kit. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 20. The overall parasite positivity using light microscopy and CareStart™ RDT was 41 (12.8%) and 43 (13.4%), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of CareStart™ RDT, regardless of species, were found to be 95.4 and 99.3%, respectively. Furthermore, the sensitivity of CareStart™ RDT for Plasmodium falciparum or mixed infection and non-falciparum malaria parasites was 94.4 and 85.0%, respectively while the specificity was found to be 98.9 and 99.7%, respectively. The agreement between the two test methods was "excellent" with a kappa value of 0.92. CareStart™ RDT has very good sensitivity and specificity for malaria diagnosis. The test kit also has an excellent agreement with light microscopy. It is therefore useful in resource-limited areas where microscopy is not available. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 81 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 29 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 15% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 21% |
| Unknown | 31 | 38% |
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 12 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,898,929
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,157
of 7,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,916
of 317,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#113
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,715 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 317,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.