↓ Skip to main content

Cost analysis of tuberculin skin test and the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-tube test for tuberculosis screening in a correctional setting in Dallas, Texas, USA

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
Cost analysis of tuberculin skin test and the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-tube test for tuberculosis screening in a correctional setting in Dallas, Texas, USA
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1901-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ank E. Nijhawan, Princess A. Iroh, Larry S. Brown, Daniel Winetsky, Esmaeil Porsa

Abstract

Tuberculosis (TB) disproportionately affects immigrants, HIV-infected individuals, and those living in crowded settings such as homeless shelters and correctional facilities. Although the majority of jails and prisons use a tuberculin skin test (TST) for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening, limited data exist on the clinical performance and costs of the TST compared to interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) in this setting. A prospective pilot study comparing cost between TST and an IGRA (QuantiFERON Gold In-tube, QFT-GIT) for the detection of LTBI in a convenience sample of inmates entering the Dallas County Jail (DCJ) was conducted June-October 2014. Participants completed a risk questionnaire, TST placement, QFT-GIT testing, and were offered opt-out HIV-Ab testing. LTBI prevalence based on TST and QFT-GIT results, an evaluation of discordant results and a cost analysis are presented. A total of 529 subjects were enrolled. The majority were male (75 %), and 46 % were Black, 29 % White, and 24 % Hispanic. Most (85 %) had been previously incarcerated. Over 28 % of participants were released prior to TST reading, with paired QFT-GIT and TST results available for 351 subjects. Of these, nine (2.6 %) tested positive by TST and 47 (13.4 %) tested positive by QFT-GIT. It costs $23.27 more per inmate per year to screen with QFT-GIT than TST in this population, though the cost per LTBI case detected was nearly three times higher for TST than QFT-GIT ($1247 v $460). We found a substantially higher rate of QFT-GIT positivity compared to TST in this sample of individuals entering the Dallas County Jail. Although no gold standard exists, this finding may indicate under-recognized LTBI in this setting. QFT-GIT as an initial screening tool was more time-efficient, had four-fold fewer labor costs and provided results on more individuals when compared with the TST. The overall cost of QFT-GIT was $23.27 more per inmate per year, though the cost per LTBI case detected was nearly three times higher for TST than QFT-GIT. Further research is needed to determine the long-term performance of IGRA testing in the correctional setting and the public health implications of pairing QFT-GIT screening with other tests for communicable diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 18%
Researcher 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Other 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 25 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Psychology 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 33 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#12,907,063
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,971
of 7,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,610
of 319,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#82
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 319,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 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 62% of its contemporaries.