↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Xpert® MTB/RIF assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
605 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
808 Mendeley
Title
Xpert® MTB/RIF assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009593.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen R Steingart, Ian Schiller, David J Horne, Madhukar Pai, Catharina C Boehme, Nandini Dendukuri

Abstract

Accurate, rapid detection of tuberculosis (TB) and TB drug resistance is critical for improving patient care and decreasing TB transmission. Xpert® MTB/RIF assay is an automated test that can detect both TB and rifampicin resistance, generally within two hours after starting the test, with minimal hands-on technical time. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued initial recommendations on Xpert® MTB/RIF in early 2011. A Cochrane Review on the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert® MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB and rifampicin resistance was published January 2013. We performed this updated Cochrane Review as part of a WHO process to develop updated guidelines on the use of the test.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters 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 808 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 5 <1%
South Africa 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 6 <1%
Unknown 779 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 159 20%
Student > Master 146 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 98 12%
Student > Postgraduate 81 10%
Student > Bachelor 67 8%
Other 164 20%
Unknown 93 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 368 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 49 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 47 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 44 5%
Other 90 11%
Unknown 142 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 29 February 2020.
All research outputs
#471,221
of 17,549,474 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,088
of 11,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,647
of 263,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,549,474 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 263,809 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 183 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.