↓ Skip to main content

Syphilis in the Americas: a protocol for a systematic review of syphilis prevalence and incidence in four high-risk groups, 1980–2016

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Syphilis in the Americas: a protocol for a systematic review of syphilis prevalence and incidence in four high-risk groups, 1980–2016
Published in
Systematic Reviews, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13643-017-0595-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ken Kitayama, Eddy R. Segura, Jordan E. Lake, Amaya G. Perez-Brumer, Catherine E. Oldenburg, Bethany A. Myers, Paria Pourjavaheri, Chinomnso N. Okorie, Robinson L. Cabello, Jesse L. Clark

Abstract

Syphilis infection has recently resurfaced as a significant public health problem. Although there has been a tremendous amount of research on the epidemiology of syphilis, there has been limited work done to synthesize the extensive body of research and systematically estimate patterns of disease within high-risk groups in the Americas. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to (1) summarize recent patterns of syphilis infection in North and South America among four high-risk groups (MSM, transgender women, sex workers, and incarcerated individuals) from 1980 to 2016, (2) identify and differentiate regional geographic epidemiologic characteristics, and (3) compare the epidemics of the economically developed countries of North America from the developing countries and public health systems of Latin America and the Caribbean. Primary studies reporting syphilis prevalence and/or incidence in at least one of the four high-risk groups will be identified from Medline/PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, SciELO, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, CINAHL, Clase, and Periódica, as well as "gray" literature sources (conference abstracts, country reports, etc.). Studies published from 1980 through 2016 will be included. Data will be extracted from studies meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria and a random effects meta-analysis of prevalence and incidence estimates will be conducted. Heterogeneity, risk of bias, and publication bias will be assessed. Pooled prevalence and incidence estimates will be calculated for comparisons based on geographic region, risk factors, and time period. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aims to contribute to an improved understanding of global epidemiologic patterns of syphilis infection in most-at-risk populations. Through systematic classification of the existing literature, and comparison of disease patterns across regional, temporal and socio-behavioral differences, we hope to improve public health surveillance and improve efforts to control the spread of disease across the Americas. PROSPERO CRD42016047306.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 21%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 13 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 20 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,053,447
of 13,322,622 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#779
of 1,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,013
of 274,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,322,622 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 274,248 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 50% of its contemporaries.