↓ Skip to main content

The role of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay among adolescents suspected of pulmonary tuberculosis in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Overview of attention for article published in Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
The role of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay among adolescents suspected of pulmonary tuberculosis in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Published in
Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, April 2018
DOI 10.1590/0037-8682-0298-2017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thania Luiza de Andrade Sieiro, Rafaela Baroni Aurílio, Elizabeth Cristina C. Soares, Silvia S. Chiang, Clemax Couto Sant´Anna

Abstract

The teste rápido molecular para tuberculose (TRM-TB) was introduced in 2014 in Brazil for tuberculosis screening. However, its role in adolescents in Brazil has not been studied. A descriptive study of adolescents with suspected tuberculosis using National Laboratory software. Of 852 (15.4%) suspected cases, 131 were positive by TRM-TB and 2% were resistant to rifampicin. Among TRM-TB-positive cases, 105 (91.4%) were culture-positive. Sixty-four of 96 samples were sensitive to rifampicin by TRM-TB; 11 were resistant to other drugs by drug sensitivity test (DST). Among suspected cases, 16% were diagnosed by TRM-TB, of which 17% were drug-resistant by DST.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 14 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 38%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 50%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
#365
of 1,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,075
of 343,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,193 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 343,807 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.