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 |
The Evaluation of a Rapid In Situ HIV Confirmation Test in a Programme with a High Failure Rate of the WHO HIV Two-Test Diagnostic Algorithm
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, February 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0004351 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Derryck B. Klarkowski, Joseph M. Wazome, Kamalini M. Lokuge, Leslie Shanks, Clair F. Mills, Daniel P. O'Brien |
| Abstract |
Concerns about false-positive HIV results led to a review of testing procedures used in a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) HIV programme in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. In addition to the WHO HIV rapid diagnostic test algorithm (RDT) (two positive RDTs alone for HIV diagnosis) used in voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) sites we evaluated in situ a practical field-based confirmation test against western blot WB. In addition, we aimed to determine the false-positive rate of the WHO two-test algorithm compared with our adapted protocol including confirmation testing, and whether weakly reactive compared with strongly reactive rapid test results were more likely to be false positives. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 33% |
| Engineering | 9 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 October 2021.
All research outputs
#3,815,732
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#47,276
of 202,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,475
of 175,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#155
of 541 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 175,006 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 541 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 71% of its contemporaries.