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 |
How long do rapid diagnostic tests remain positive after anti-malarial treatment?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Malaria Journal, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12936-018-2371-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ursula Dalrymple, Rohan Arambepola, Peter W. Gething, Ewan Cameron |
| Abstract |
Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are increasingly becoming a paradigm for both clinical diagnosis of malaria infections and for estimating community parasite prevalence in household malaria indicator surveys in malaria-endemic countries. The antigens detected by RDTs are known to persist in the blood after treatment with anti-malarials, but reports on the duration of persistence (and the effect this has on RDT positivity) of these antigens post-treatment have been variable. In this review, published studies on the persistence of positivity of RDTs post-treatment are collated, and a bespoke Bayesian survival model is fit to estimate the number of days RDTs remain positive after treatment. Half of RDTs that detect the antigen histidine-rich protein II (HRP2) are still positive 15 (5-32) days post-treatment, 13 days longer than RDTs that detect the antigen Plasmodium lactate dehydrogenase, and that 5% of HRP2 RDTs are still positive 36 (21-61) days after treatment. The duration of persistent positivity for combination RDTs that detect both antigens falls between that for HRP2- or pLDH-only RDTs, with half of RDTs remaining positive at 7 (2-20) days post-treatment. This study shows that children display persistent RDT positivity for longer after treatment than adults, and that persistent positivity is more common when an individual is treated with artemisinin combination therapy than when treated with other anti-malarials. RDTs remain positive for a highly variable amount of time after treatment with anti-malarials, and the duration of positivity is highly dependent on the type of RDT used for diagnosis. Additionally, age and treatment both impact the duration of persistence of RDT positivity. The results presented here suggest that caution should be taken when using RDT-derived diagnostic outcomes from cross-sectional data where individuals have had a recent history of anti-malarial treatment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 5 | 11% |
| Kenya | 4 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 9% |
| Spain | 4 | 9% |
| Italy | 2 | 4% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Australia | 2 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 29 | 64% |
| Scientists | 7 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 177 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 17% |
| Researcher | 28 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 49 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 56 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 28 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,132,432
of 25,718,113 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#148
of 5,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,204
of 343,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#4
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,718,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 343,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.