↓ Skip to main content

High prevalence of rectal gonorrhoea among men reporting contact with men with gonorrhoea: Implications for epidemiological treatment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
High prevalence of rectal gonorrhoea among men reporting contact with men with gonorrhoea: Implications for epidemiological treatment
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1971-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krishneel Dutt, Eric P.F. Chow, Sarah Huffam, Karen Klassen, Christopher K. Fairley, Catriona S Bradshaw, Ian Denham, Marcus Y. Chen

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of gonorrhoea and factors associated with rectal gonorrhoea among men reporting sexual contact with men with gonorrhoea. Men who presented to Melbourne Sexual Health Centre reporting sexual contact with a male with gonorrhoea were prospectively identified between March 2011 and December 2013. These men were screened for pharyngeal and rectal gonorrhoea using culture. The prevalence of gonorrhoea among contacts was compared to that among all men who have sex with men (MSM) screened at the clinic over the same period. Among 363 contacts of gonorrhoea the prevalence of rectal gonorrhoea was 26.4 % (95 % CI: 21.8 %-31.0 %) compared to 3.9 % (95 % CI: 3.7 %-4.2 %) among clinic attendees (p < 0.001). The prevalence of pharyngeal gonorrhoea among contacts was 9.4 % (95 % CI: 6.4 %-12.4 %) compared to 2.1 % (95 % CI: 1.9 %-2.4 %) among clinic attendees (p < 0.001). Among contacts who reported not always using condoms during receptive anal sex with casual partners, rectal gonorrhoea was cultured in 42.4 % compared with 12.7 % among contacts reporting no receptive anal sex (p < 0.001) and 20.2 % among those reporting always using condoms (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis rectal gonorrhoea was associated with inconsistent condom use during receptive anal sex with casual partners (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 4.16; 95 % CI: 1.87-9.26) and a reported past history of gonorrhoea (AOR: 1.77; 95 % CI: 1.01-3.14). The high proportion of positive cases of gonorrhoea among contacts in this study supports epidemiological treatment of MSM presenting as contacts of gonorrhoea.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Other 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 18%
Mathematics 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,690,833
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,805
of 14,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,838
of 262,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#200
of 270 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 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 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 262,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 270 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.