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 |
Accuracy of diagnosis among clinical malaria patients: comparing microscopy, RDT and a highly sensitive quantitative PCR looking at the implications for submicroscopic infections
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, March 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-023-04506-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen Opoku Afriyie, Thomas Kwame Addison, Yilekal Gebre, Abdul-Hakim Mutala, Kwasi Baako Antwi, Dawood Ackom Abbas, Kofi Agyapong Addo, Austine Tweneboah, Nana Kwame Ayisi-Boateng, Cristian Koepfli, Kingsley Badu |
| Abstract |
The World Health Organization recommends parasitological confirmation of all suspected malaria cases by microscopy or rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) before treatment. These conventional tools are widely used for point-of-care diagnosis in spite of their poor sensitivity at low parasite density. Previous studies in Ghana have compared microscopy and RDT using standard 18S rRNA PCR as reference with varying outcomes. However, how these conventional tools compare with ultrasensitive varATS qPCR has not been studied. This study, therefore, sought to investigate the clinical performance of microscopy and RDT assuming highly sensitive varATS qPCR as gold standard. 1040 suspected malaria patients were recruited from two primary health care centers in the Ashanti Region of Ghana and tested for malaria by microscopy, RDT, and varATS qPCR. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were assessed using varATS qPCR as gold standard. Parasite prevalence was 17.5%, 24.5%, and 42.1% by microscopy, RDT, and varATS qPCR respectively. Using varATS qPCR as the standard, RDT was more sensitive (55.7% vs 39.3%), equally specific (98.2% vs 98.3%), and reported higher positive (95.7% vs 94.5%) and negative predictive values (75.3% vs 69.0%) than microscopy. Consequently, RDT recorded better diagnostic agreement (kappa = 0.571) with varATS qPCR than microscopy (kappa = 0.409) for clinical detection of malaria. RDT outperformed microscopy for the diagnosis of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in the study. However, both tests missed over 40% of infections that were detected by varATS qPCR. Novel tools are needed to ensure prompt diagnosis of all clinical malaria cases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Kenya | 2 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Uganda | 1 | 4% |
| Peru | 1 | 4% |
| Honduras | 1 | 4% |
| Ghana | 1 | 4% |
| South Africa | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 58% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 21% |
| Scientists | 4 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 45 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 13 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 47 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 23 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,313,686
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#435
of 5,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,447
of 426,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#4
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 426,799 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.