↓ Skip to main content

Updating vital status by tracking in the community among patients with epidemic Kaposi sarcoma who are lost to follow-up in sub-Saharan Africa

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Updating vital status by tracking in the community among patients with epidemic Kaposi sarcoma who are lost to follow-up in sub-Saharan Africa
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3549-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aggrey Semeere, Esther Freeman, Megan Wenger, David Glidden, Mwebesa Bwana, Micheal Kanyesigye, Fredrick Chite Asirwa, Elyne Rotich, Naftali Busakhala, Emmanuel Oga, Elima Jedy-Agba, Vivian Kwaghe, Kenneth Iregbu, Clement Adebamowo, Antoine Jaquet, Francois Dabis, Sam Phiri, Julia Bohlius, Matthias Egger, Constantin T. Yiannoutsos, Kara Wools-Kaloustian, Jeffrey Martin

Abstract

Throughout most of sub-Saharan Africa (and, indeed, most resource-limited areas), lack of death registries prohibits linkage of cancer diagnoses and precludes the most expeditious approach to determining cancer survival. Instead, estimation of cancer survival often uses clinical records, which have some mortality data but are replete with patients who are lost to follow-up (LTFU), some of which may be caused by undocumented death. The end result is that accurate estimation of cancer survival is rarely performed. A prominent example of a common cancer in Africa for which survival data are needed but for which frequent LTFU has precluded accurate estimation is Kaposi sarcoma (KS). Using electronic records, we identified all newly diagnosed KS among HIV-infected adults at 33 primary care clinics in Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, and Malawi from 2009 to 2012. We determined those patients who were apparently LTFU, defined as absent from clinic for ≥90 days at database closure and unknown to be dead or transferred. Using standardized protocols which included manual chart review, telephone calls, and physical tracking in the community, we attempted to update vital status amongst patients who were LTFU. We identified 1222 patients with KS, of whom 440 were LTFU according to electronic records. Manual chart review revealed that 18 (4.1%) were classified as LFTU due to clerical error, leaving 422 as truly LTFU. Of these 422, we updated vital status in 78%; manual chart review was responsible for updating in 5.7%, telephone calls in 26%, and physical tracking in 46%. Among 378 patients who consented at clinic enrollment to be tracked if they became LTFU and who had sufficient geographic contact/locator information, we updated vital status in 88%. Duration of LTFU was not associated with success of tracking, but tracking success was better in Kenya than the other sites. It is feasible to update vital status in a large fraction of patients with HIV-associated KS in sub-Saharan Africa who have become LTFU from clinical care. This finding likely applies to other cancers as well. Updating vital status amongst lost patients paves the way towards accurate determination of cancer survival.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 32%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 36%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 16 30%

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 31 October 2017.
All research outputs
#3,444,416
of 12,077,989 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#945
of 4,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,788
of 284,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#51
of 268 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,077,989 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,426 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 284,698 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 268 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.