↓ Skip to main content

Performance of rapid diagnostic test, blood-film microscopy and PCR for the diagnosis of malaria infection among febrile children from Korogwe District, Tanzania

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 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
Performance of rapid diagnostic test, blood-film microscopy and PCR for the diagnosis of malaria infection among febrile children from Korogwe District, Tanzania
Published in
Malaria Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1450-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Coline Mahende, Billy Ngasala, John Lusingu, Tai-Soon Yong, Paminus Lushino, Martha Lemnge, Bruno Mmbando, Zul Premji

Abstract

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and light microscopy are still recommended for diagnosis to guide the clinical management of malaria despite difficult challenges in rural settings. The performance of these tests may be affected by several factors, including malaria prevalence and intensity of transmission. The study evaluated the diagnostic performance of malaria RDT, light microscopy and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in detecting malaria infections among febrile children at outpatient clinic in Korogwe District, northeastern Tanzania. The study enrolled children aged 2-59 months with fever and/or history of fever in the previous 48 h attending outpatient clinics. Blood samples were collected for identification of Plasmodium falciparum infection using histidine-rich-protein-2 (HRP-2)-based malaria RDT, light microscopy and conventional PCR. A total of 867 febrile patients were enrolled into the study. Malaria-positive samples were 85/867 (9.8 %, 95 % CI, 7.9-12.0 %) by RDT, 72/867 (8.3 %, 95 % CI, 6.5-10.1 %) by microscopy and 79/677 (11.7 %, 95 % CI, 9.3-14.3 %) by PCR. The performance of malaria RDT compared with microscopy results had sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of 88.9 % (95 % CI, 79.3-95.1 %) and 75.3 % (95 % CI, 64.8-84.0 %), respectively. Confirmation of P. falciparum infection with PCR analysis provided lower sensitivity and PPV of 88.6 % (95 % CI, 79.5-94.7 %) and 84.3 % (95 % CI, 74.7-91.4 %) for RDT compared to microscopy. Diagnosis of malaria infection is still a challenge due to variation in results among diagnostic methods. HRP-2 malaria RDT and microscopy were less sensitive than PCR. Diagnostic tools with high sensitivity are required in areas of low malaria transmission.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 180 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 18%
Researcher 28 15%
Student > Bachelor 24 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 13%
Student > Postgraduate 16 9%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 38 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 44 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 April 2017.
All research outputs
#696,851
of 19,434,371 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#91
of 5,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,038
of 275,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,434,371 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,096 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 275,208 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them