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 |
Evaluation performance of diagnostic methods of intestinal parasitosis in school age children in Ethiopia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-015-1822-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mulat Yimer, Tadesse Hailu, Wondemagegn Mulu, Bayeh Abera |
| Abstract |
Although the sensitivity of Wet mount technique is questionable, it is the major diagnostic technique for routine diagnosis of intestinal parasitosis in Ethiopia. Therefore, the aim of this study was the evaluation performance of diagnostic methods of intestinal parasitosis in school age children in Ethiopia. A cross sectional study was conducted from May to June 2013. Single stool sample was processed for direct, Formol ether concentration (FEC) and Kato Katz methods. The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnostic tests were calculated in terms of the "Gold" standard method (the combined result of the three methods altogether). A total of 422 school age children were participated in this study. The prevalence of intestinal parasites was high (74.6 %) with Kato Katz technique. The sensitivity of Wet mount, FEC and Kato Katz tests against the Gold standard test was 48.9, 63.1 and 93.7 %, respectively. Kato Katz technique revealed a better NPV 80.4 (80.1-80.6) as compared to the Wet mount (33.7 %) and FEC techniques (41.3 %). In this study, the Kato Katz technique outperformed the other two methods but the true values for sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic values are not known. Moreover, it is labor intensive and not easily accessible. Hence, it is preferable to use FEC technique to complement the Wet mount test. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,433,196
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,017
of 4,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#282,576
of 391,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#103
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 391,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.