↓ Skip to main content

Meta-analysis of the utility of culture, biopsy, and direct KOH examination for the diagnosis of onychomycosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

1 policy source
3 Wikipedia pages


41 Dimensions

Readers on

96 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.
Meta-analysis of the utility of culture, biopsy, and direct KOH examination for the diagnosis of onychomycosis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2258-3
Pubmed ID

Verónica Velasquez-Agudelo, Jaiberth Antonio Cardona-Arias


Onychomycosis is a highly prevalent disease worldwide. There is no standard test for its diagnosis, which remains costly, wasteful, and is sometimes delayed. The diagnostic tests for this disease are few and discordant. The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic validity, performance, and accuracy of culture, nail clipping with Periodic Acid-Schiff -PAS- staining (biopsy), and direct potassium hydroxide (KOH) examination for the study of onychomycosis. A systematic review was conducted via meta-analysis using 5 databases and 21 search strategies. An ex ante protocol was applied with inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratios, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and proportion of correctly diagnosed patients were evaluated with the meta-analysis of studies of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests (Meta-DiSc) and Epidat using a random effects model. The efficiency or accuracy of the three tests is influenced by the methodological quality of the studies. These values are lower for KOH and culture and higher for biopsy in moderate quality studies. The diagnostic tests evaluated in this meta-analysis independently showed acceptable validity, performance, and efficiency, with nail clipping with PAS staining outperforming the other two tests.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Other 10 10%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 21 22%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 18 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 December 2022.
All research outputs
of 22,148,987 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
of 7,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 301,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,148,987 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 301,498 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them