↓ Skip to main content

The diagnosis of urinary tract infections in young children (DUTY): protocol for a diagnostic and prospective observational study to derive and validate a clinical algorithm for the diagnosis of UTI…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The diagnosis of urinary tract infections in young children (DUTY): protocol for a diagnostic and prospective observational study to derive and validate a clinical algorithm for the diagnosis of UTI in children presenting to primary care with an acute illness
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-12-158
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harriet Downing, Emma Thomas-Jones, Micaela Gal, Cherry-Ann Waldron, Jonathan Sterne, William Hollingworth, Kerenza Hood, Brendan Delaney, Paul Little, Robin Howe, Mandy Wootton, Alastair Macgowan, Christopher C Butler, Alastair D Hay

Abstract

Urinary tract infection (UTI) is common in children, and may cause serious illness and recurrent symptoms. However, obtaining a urine sample from young children in primary care is challenging and not feasible for large numbers. Evidence regarding the predictive value of symptoms, signs and urinalysis for UTI in young children is urgently needed to help primary care clinicians better identify children who should be investigated for UTI. This paper describes the protocol for the Diagnosis of Urinary Tract infection in Young children (DUTY) study. The overall study aim is to derive and validate a cost-effective clinical algorithm for the diagnosis of UTI in children presenting to primary care acutely unwell.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 137 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 17%
Student > Master 21 15%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Postgraduate 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 61 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 28 20%

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 19 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,010,843
of 22,489,892 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,364
of 7,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,121
of 144,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,489,892 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 144,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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