↓ Skip to main content

A survey of tuberculosis infection control practices at the NIH/NIAID/DAIDS-supported clinical trial sites in low and middle income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
A survey of tuberculosis infection control practices at the NIH/NIAID/DAIDS-supported clinical trial sites in low and middle income countries
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1579-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catherine Godfrey, Gail Tauscher, Sally Hunsberger, Melissa Austin, Lesley Scott, Jeffrey T. Schouten, Anne F. Luetkemeyer, Constance Benson, Robert Coombs, Susan Swindells, HIV Network Coordinating (HANC) TB Diagnostic Laboratory Working Division of AIDS, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Abstract

Health care associated transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) is well described. A previous survey of infection control (IC) practices at clinical research sites in low and middle income countries (LMIC) funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) conducting HIV research identified issues with respiratory IC practices. A guideline for TB IC based on international recommendations was developed and promulgated. This paper reports on adherence to the guideline at sites conducting or planning to conduct TB studies with the intention of supporting improvement. A survey was developed that assessed IC activities in three domains: facility level measures, administrative control measures and environmental measures. An external site monitor visited each site in 2013-2014, to complete the audit. A central review committee evaluated the site-level survey and results were tabulated. Fisher's exact test was performed to determine whether there were significant differences in practices at sites that had IC officers versus sites that did not have IC officers. Significance was assessed at p</=.05 RESULTS: Seven of thirty-three sites surveyed (22 %) had all the evaluated tuberculosis IC (TB IC) elements in place. Sixty-one percent of sites had an IC officer tasked with developing and maintaining TB IC standard operating procedures. Twenty-two (71 %) sites promptly identified and segregated individuals with TB symptoms. Thirty (93 %) sites had a separate waiting area for patients, and 26 (81 %) collected sputum within a specific well-ventilated area that was separate from the general waiting area. Sites with an IC officer were more likely to have standard operating procedures covering TB IC practices (p = 0.02) and monitor those policies (p = 0.02) and perform regular surveillance of healthcare workers (p = 0.02). The presence of an IC officer had a positive impact on performance in most of the TB IC domains surveyed including having adequate ventilation (p = 0.02) and a separate area for sputum collection (p = 0.02) CONCLUSIONS: Specific and targeted support of TB IC activities in the clinical research environment is needed and is likely to have a positive and sustained impact on preventing the transmission of TB to both health care workers and vulnerable HIV-infected research participants.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 20%
Student > Master 17 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Unspecified 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,808,979
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,125
of 7,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,687
of 345,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#106
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 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 7,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. 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 345,199 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.