↓ Skip to main content

Are routine tuberculosis programme data suitable to report on antiretroviral therapy use of HIV-infected tuberculosis patients?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Are routine tuberculosis programme data suitable to report on antiretroviral therapy use of HIV-infected tuberculosis patients?
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-6-23
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miranda Brouwer, Paula Samo Gudo, Chalice Mage Simbe, Paula Perdigão, Frank van Leth

Abstract

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is lifesaving for HIV-infected tuberculosis (TB) patients. ART-use by these patients lag behind compared to HIV-testing and co-trimoxazole preventive therapy. TB programmes provide the data on ART-use by HIV-infected TB patients, however often the HIV services provide the ART. We evaluated whether the data on ART-use in the TB register were complete and correct. The timing of ART initiation was evaluated to assess whether reporting on ART-use could have happened with the TB case finding reporting. We collected data on TB treatment, HIV testing and ART for adult TB cases in 2007 from three TB clinics in Manica Province, Mozambique. These data on use of ART from TB registers were compared with those from the HIV services.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 2%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 8 18%
Other 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Social Sciences 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 April 2013.
All research outputs
#3,534,540
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#484
of 4,255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,386
of 284,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#9
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,255 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 284,842 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.