↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Evaluation of a new automated Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH assay for qualitative detection of rifampicin/isoniazid resistance in pulmonary and extra-pulmonary clinical samples of Mycobacterium…

Overview of attention for article published in Infection and Drug Resistance, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of a new automated Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH assay for qualitative detection of rifampicin/isoniazid resistance in pulmonary and extra-pulmonary clinical samples of Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Published in
Infection and Drug Resistance, December 2017
DOI 10.2147/idr.s147272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pilar Ruiz, Manuel Causse, Manuel Vaquero, Juan Bautista Gutierrez, Manuel Casal

Abstract

A new automated real-time PCR assay for the detection of rifampicin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) was evaluated. A total of 163 clinical samples (128 pulmonary and 35 extra-pulmonary) were processed using four PCR assay kits: Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH, Genotype MTBDRplus, Xpert/MTB RIF, and Anyplex MTB/MDR. The results of phenotypic drug-susceptibility testing using BACTECMGIT 960 were used as reference. The sensitivity and specificity of the new Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH assay in comparison with phenotypic testing was 96.3% (95%CI 87.32%-100%) for RIF and 100% (95%CI 99.3%-100%) for INH; the sensitivity was 78.8% (95%CI 66.8%-90.9%) and the specificity was 100% (95%CI 98.9%-100%). The Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH test could be a valid method for detecting the most common mutations in strains resistant to RIF and INH.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Master 4 16%
Other 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Mathematics 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 12 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 March 2019.
All research outputs
#13,499,741
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Infection and Drug Resistance
#414
of 1,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,943
of 437,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection and Drug Resistance
#7
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,682 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 437,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.