↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of missing data procedures for addressing selection bias in HIV sentinel surveillance data

Overview of attention for article published in Population Health Metrics, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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 comparison of missing data procedures for addressing selection bias in HIV sentinel surveillance data
Published in
Population Health Metrics, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1478-7954-11-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Ng, Emmanuela Gakidou, Christopher JL Murray, Stephen S Lim

Abstract

Selection bias is common in clinic-based HIV surveillance. Clinics located in HIV hotspots are often the first to be chosen and monitored, while clinics in less prevalent areas are added to the surveillance system later on. Consequently, the estimated HIV prevalence based on clinic data is substantially distorted, with markedly higher HIV prevalence in the earlier periods and trends that reveal much more dramatic declines than actually occur.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 33%
Other 3 17%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 22%
Social Sciences 4 22%
Mathematics 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 3 17%
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 25 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,274,524
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Metrics
#307
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,267
of 197,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Metrics
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 197,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.