↓ Skip to main content

Zika virus infection in pregnant women in Honduras: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Zika virus infection in pregnant women in Honduras: study protocol
Published in
Reproductive Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12978-016-0200-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierre Buekens, Jackeline Alger, Fernando Althabe, Eduardo Bergel, Amanda M. Berrueta, Carolina Bustillo, Maria-Luisa Cafferata, Emily Harville, Karla Rosales, Dawn M. Wesson, Concepcion Zuniga, for the ZIPH Working Group

Abstract

Although there is increasing evidence for a relationship between symptomatic Zika virus (ZIKV) maternal infection, and microcephaly, a firm causal relation has yet to be established by epidemiologic studies. Studies also need to be conducted in recently infected settings. Our objectives are to assess the frequency of ZIKV infection during pregnancy in Honduras and the association of microcephaly with ZIKV infection. We will perform a prospective study enrolling pregnant women at their first antenatal visit and following them up until delivery. At the time of enrollment, women will be interviewed to collect socio-demographic data, data needed to locate them for potential additional follow-up, and data about ZIKV symptoms during pregnancy. We will also collect maternal blood as soon as possible after enrollment. A probable maternal ZIKV infection will be defined as positive for maternal ZIKV IgM. A confirmed maternal ZIKV infection will be defined as positive for ZIKV IgM confirmed by plaque reduction neutralization test. Microcephaly at birth will be defined as an occipito-frontal circumference <2SD for sex and gestational age. Our objective is to enroll 2000 pregnant women. In a first step, we will follow a case cohort design and only analyze blood samples for cases and a sub-cohort of 200 women randomly selected. Blood samples for the entire population will be analyzed at a later stage if funds are available. This protocol was designed to be implemented with minimal resources. It allows a cohort to be built, which could be a foundation for future in-depth and follow-up studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 20%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 22 21%
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 17 July 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,220
of 1,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,008
of 372,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#32
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,567 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 372,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.