↓ Skip to main content

Improvement of malaria diagnostic system based on acridine orange staining

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

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
Improvement of malaria diagnostic system based on acridine orange staining
Published in
Malaria Journal, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12936-018-2214-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masatsugu Kimura, Isao Teramoto, Chim W. Chan, Zulkarnain Md Idris, James Kongere, Wataru Kagaya, Fumihiko Kawamoto, Ryoko Asada, Rie Isozumi, Akira Kaneko

Abstract

Rapid diagnosis of malaria using acridine orange (AO) staining and a light microscope with a halogen lamp and interference filter was deployed in some malaria-endemic countries. However, it has not been widely adopted because: (1) the lamp was weak as an excitation light and the set-up did not work well under unstable power supply; and, (2) the staining of samples was frequently inconsistent. The halogen lamp was replaced by a low-cost, blue light-emitting diode (LED) lamp. Using a reformulated AO solution, the staining protocol was revised to make use of a concentration gradient instead of uniform staining. To evaluate this new AO diagnostic system, a pilot field study was conducted in the Lake Victoria basin in Kenya. Without staining failure, malaria infection status of about 100 samples was determined on-site per one microscopist per day, using the improved AO diagnostic system. The improved AO diagnosis had both higher overall sensitivity (46.1 vs 38.9%: p = 0.08) and specificity (99.0 vs 96.3%) than the Giemsa method (N = 1018), using PCR diagnosis as the standard. Consistent AO staining of thin blood films and rapid evaluation of malaria parasitaemia with the revised protocol produced superior results relative to the Giemsa method. This AO diagnostic system can be set up easily at low cost using an ordinary light microscope. It may supplement rapid diagnostic tests currently used in clinical settings in malaria-endemic countries, and may be considered as an inexpensive tool for case surveillance in malaria-eliminating countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 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 %
Student > Bachelor 10 19%
Student > Master 8 15%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Lecturer 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Unspecified 4 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 20 38%
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 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#13,227,345
of 23,020,670 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,304
of 5,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,181
of 437,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#81
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,020,670 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 437,836 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.