↓ Skip to main content

Community referral for presumptive TB in Nigeria: a comparison of four models of active case finding

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 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
Community referral for presumptive TB in Nigeria: a comparison of four models of active case finding
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2769-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. O. Adejumo, B. Azuogu, O. Okorie, O. M. Lawal, O. J. Onazi, M. Gidado, O. J. Daniel, J. C. Okeibunor, E. Klinkenberg, E. M. H. Mitchell

Abstract

Engagement of communities and civil society organizations is a critical part of the Post-2015 End TB Strategy. Since 2007, many models of community referral have been implemented to boost TB case detection in Nigeria. Yet clear insights into the comparative TB yield from particular approaches have been limited. We compared four models of active case finding in three Nigerian states. Data on presumptive TB case referral by community workers (CWs), TB diagnoses among referred clients, active case finding model characteristics, and CWs compensation details for 2012 were obtained from implementers and CWs via interviews and log book review. Self-reported performance data were triangulated against routine surveillance data to assess concordance. Analysis focused on assessing the predictors of presumptive TB referral. CWs referred 4-22 % of presumptive TB clients tested, and 4-24 % of the total TB cases detected. The annual median referral per CW ranged widely among the models from 1 to 48 clients, with an overall average of 13.4 referrals per CW. The highest median referrals (48 per CW/yr) and mean TB diagnoses (7.1/yr) per CW (H =70.850, p < 0.001) was obtained by the model with training supervision, and $80/quarterly payments (Comprehensive Quotas-Oriented model). The model with irregularly supervised, trained, and compensated CWs contributed the least to TB case detection with a median of 13 referrals per CW/yr and mean of 0.53 TB diagnoses per CW/yr. Hours spent weekly on presumptive TB referral made the strongest unique contribution (Beta = 0.514, p < 0.001) to explaining presumptive TB referral after controlling for other variables. All community based TB case-finding projects studied referred a relative low number of symptomatic individuals. The study shows that incentivized referral, appropriate selection of CWs, supportive supervision, leveraged treatment support roles, and a responsive TB program to receive clients for testing were the key drivers of community TB case finding.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 168 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 22%
Researcher 28 16%
Student > Postgraduate 20 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 31 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 18%
Social Sciences 15 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 39 23%
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 07 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,252,924
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,359
of 14,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,864
of 298,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#153
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 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 14,888 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 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 298,745 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 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.