↓ Skip to main content

Infectious disease testing of UK-bound refugees: a population-based, cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Infectious disease testing of UK-bound refugees: a population-based, cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12916-018-1125-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison F. Crawshaw, Manish Pareek, John Were, Steffen Schillinger, Olga Gorbacheva, Kolitha P. Wickramage, Sema Mandal, Valerie Delpech, Noel Gill, Hilary Kirkbride, Dominik Zenner

Abstract

The UK, like a number of other countries, has a refugee resettlement programme. External factors, such as higher prevalence of infectious diseases in the country of origin and circumstances of travel, are likely to increase the infectious disease risk of refugees, but published data is scarce. The International Organization for Migration carries out and collates data on standardised pre-entry health assessments (HA), including testing for infectious diseases, on all UK refugee applicants as part of the resettlement programme. From this data, we report the yield of selected infectious diseases (tuberculosis (TB), HIV, syphilis, hepatitis B and hepatitis C) and key risk factors with the aim of informing public health policy. We examined a large cohort of refugees (n = 18,418) who underwent a comprehensive pre-entry HA between March 2013 and August 2017. We calculated yields of infectious diseases stratified by nationality and compared these with published (mostly WHO) estimates. We assessed factors associated with case positivity in univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. The number of refugees included in the analysis varied by disease (range 8506-9759). Overall yields were notably high for hepatitis B (188 cases; 2.04%, 95% CI 1.77-2.35%), while yields were below 1% for active TB (9 cases; 92 per 100,000, 48-177), HIV (31 cases; 0.4%, 0.3-0.5%), syphilis (23 cases; 0.24%, 0.15-0.36%) and hepatitis C (38 cases; 0.41%, 0.30-0.57%), and varied widely by nationality. In multivariable analysis, sub-Saharan African nationality was a risk factor for several infections (HIV: OR 51.72, 20.67-129.39; syphilis: OR 4.24, 1.21-24.82; hepatitis B: OR 4.37, 2.91-6.41). Hepatitis B (OR 2.23, 1.05-4.76) and hepatitis C (OR 5.19, 1.70-15.88) were associated with history of blood transfusion. Syphilis (OR 3.27, 1.07-9.95) was associated with history of torture, whereas HIV (OR 1521.54, 342.76-6754.23) and hepatitis B (OR 7.65, 2.33-25.18) were associated with sexually transmitted infection. Syphilis was associated with HIV (OR 10.27, 1.30-81.40). Testing refugees in an overseas setting through a systematic HA identified patients with a range of infectious diseases. Our results reflect similar patterns found in other programmes and indicate that the yields for infectious diseases vary by region and nationality. This information may help in designing a more targeted approach to testing, which has already started in the UK programme. Further work is needed to refine how best to identify infections in refugees, taking these factors into account.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Other 8 8%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 24 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Psychology 5 5%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 20 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,481,081
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,055
of 3,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,416
of 341,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#24
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 341,135 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.