↓ Skip to main content

Treatment outcomes from community-based drug resistant tuberculosis treatment programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
Treatment outcomes from community-based drug resistant tuberculosis treatment programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-14-333
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pamela Weiss, Wenjia Chen, Victoria J Cook, James C Johnston

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that community-based treatment of drug resistant tuberculosis (DRTB) is a feasible and cost-effective alternative to centralized, hospital-based care. Although several large programs have reported favourable outcomes from community-based treatment, to date there has been no systematic assessment of community-based DRTB treatment program outcomes. The objective of this study was to synthesize available evidence on treatment outcomes from community based multi-drug resistant (MDRTB) and extensively drug resistant tuberculosis (XDRTB) treatment programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 195 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 23%
Researcher 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Other 18 9%
Student > Postgraduate 15 7%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 35 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 10%
Social Sciences 11 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 4%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 39 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 August 2022.
All research outputs
#6,037,944
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,803
of 7,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,963
of 228,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#41
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 228,229 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.