↓ Skip to main content

Routine feedback of test results to participants in clinic- and survey-based surveillance of HIV

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Routine feedback of test results to participants in clinic- and survey-based surveillance of HIV
Published in
Bulletin of the World Health Organization, March 2015
DOI 10.2471/blt.15.153031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel Baggaley, Cheryl Johnson, Jesus Maria Garcia Calleja, Keith Sabin, Carla Obermeyer, Miriam Taegtmeyer, Basia Zaba, Carol El-Hayek, Jerome Amir Singh

Abstract

Surveillance for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in low- and middle-income countries started in the 1980s. However, the questions of whether the results of HIV tests should be given to participants, and if so how, has still not been resolved. In the absence of effective treatment, it was considered acceptable to withhold results from HIV-positive participants. However, when antiretroviral treatment is available, some argue for beneficence - that it is the researcher's duty to return the test results to all those who provide samples for surveillance. The corollary is that only participants who wish to receive their test results would be eligible to participate in surveys. Others argue for autonomy - that to obtain a more representative result for the general population, surveys should not exclude participants who do not wish to receive their test results. This round table discussion takes a closer look at those two arguments. We believe that the global community should work towards routine feedback of HIV surveillance while ensuring that participants receive and understand their test results.

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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 44%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 28%
Social Sciences 6 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 6 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,281,096
of 17,360,236 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#1,430
of 3,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,952
of 198,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of the World Health Organization
#7
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,940 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 198,993 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.