| Title |
Performance of the Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH resistance assay when used to test Mycobacterium tuberculosis specimens from Bangladesh
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infection and Drug Resistance, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/idr.s158953 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joshua Kostera, Gregor Leckie, Klara Abravaya, Hong Wang |
| Abstract |
The Abbott RealTime MTB RIF/INH Resistance Assay (RT MTB RIF/INH) is an assay for the detection of rifampicin (RIF)- and/or isoniazid (INH)-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB). The assay can be used to test sputum, bronchial alveolar lavage, and N-Acetyl-L-Cysteine (NALC)/NaOH pellets prepared from these samples. The assay can be used in direct testing mode, or in reflex mode following a MTB positive result produced by its companion assay, Abbott RT MTB. In this study, the direct testing mode was used to test paired sputum and NALC/NaOH pellets prepared from sputum collected from Bangladesh TB patients. One hundred and thirty two paired samples were tested. The RT MTB RIF/INH inhibition rate was 0%. One hundred and twenty-two paired samples had results above the assay limit of detection and were analyzed by comparing with results from phenotypic drug sensitivity testing, GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), and MTBDR plus (Hain). RT MTB RIF/INH results were in good agreement with those of GeneXpert and Hain. The ability of this assay to detect RIF and INH resistance may contribute to the global control of multidrug resistant tuberculosis. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 43% |
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 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,522,480
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from Infection and Drug Resistance
#742
of 1,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,911
of 326,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection and Drug Resistance
#15
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,692 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 326,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.