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 |
Implementation of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized design in routine public health practice: design and application for a tuberculosis (TB) household contact study in a high burden area of Lima, Peru
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-1883-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lena Shah, Marlene Rojas, Oscar Mori, Carlos Zamudio, Jay S. Kaufman, Larissa Otero, Eduardo Gotuzzo, Carlos Seas, Timothy F. Brewer |
| Abstract |
We designed a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in order to evaluate provider-initiated evaluation of household contacts (HCs) of smear positive tuberculosis (TB) cases within a routine TB program in Lima, Peru. National TB program (NTP) officers of San Juan de Lurigancho District (Lima, Peru) and university-based researchers jointly designed a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial design in order to evaluate a planned active case finding (ACF) program for all HCs of smear-positive TB cases in 34 district healthcare centres. Randomization of time to intervention initiation was stratified by health centre TB case rate. The ACF intervention included provider-initiated home visits of all new sputum smear positive TB patients in order to evaluate household contacts for active TB. Active TB was diagnosed using symptom screening, sputum screening, chest x-ray and clinical evaluation. Once initiated, ACF was provided by NTP staff and integrated into the routine DOTS TB program activities. This study protocol describes the pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial of active household contact evaluations within an NTP. The stepped-wedge design met overlapping needs of local TB programmers and researchers to adequately evaluate the large-scale roll out of a new control program in a TB endemic setting. Multiple planning meetings were required to develop the necessary networks and in order to understand the operations, needs and goals of the NTP staff and researchers collaborating on this project. The advantages and challenges of using this study design in practice and within existing routine TB programs in a middle-income country context are discussed. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02174380 . Registered 24 Jun 2014. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,230,708
of 22,815,414 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,337
of 14,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,521
of 263,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#172
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,815,414 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 263,581 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.