↓ Skip to main content

International external quality control assessment for the serological diagnosis of dengue infections

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
International external quality control assessment for the serological diagnosis of dengue infections
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-0877-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristina Domingo, María Joao Alves, Fernando de Ory, Anette Teichmann, Herbert Schmitz, Rolf Müller, Matthias Niedrig

Abstract

Dengue is endemic to the tropics and subtropics, and the most frequent of arthropod-borne viral diseases. Reliable diagnosis of dengue infection is important not only in clinical care but also in disease surveillance, the control of outbreaks, and the development of new vaccines. The diagnosis of dengue infection is usually established by a variety of commercial or in-house serological protocols. The European Network for the Diagnostics of Imported Viral Diseases (ENIVD) recognized the need to survey the accuracy of dengue serological diagnostics in current use, and organized an external quality assurance (EQA) study of dengue serological practice in diagnostic laboratories. A 15-sample panel, consisting of sera reactive against dengue plus specificity and negative controls, was sent to 48 laboratories for serological testing. The results returned by the participating laboratories were anonymized, scored, and subjected to comparison and statistical analysis. Ten laboratories rated all samples correctly with regard to IgM, and only three achieved the full score for IgG detection. The main handicaps in assay performance were suboptimal sensitivity of in-house IgM detection protocols by comparison with better-performing commercial ELISA tests, and the presence of IgG cross-reactivity with heterologous flaviviruses. Differences of detail in the methodology of dengue IgG antibody detection appear to underlie the disparities in accuracy observed between laboratories. This EQA study demonstrates that there is room for many laboratories to improve sensitivity in the detection of anti-dengue virus IgM antibodies, against the benchmark set by commercial antibody capture ELISA tests. The EQA shows also that cross-reactivity is a continuing issue, and IgG detection protocols must be optimized to increase their specificity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 22%
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Unspecified 5 10%
Other 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 14%
Unspecified 7 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 12%
Other 8 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,744,196
of 11,320,109 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#872
of 4,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,746
of 208,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#14
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,320,109 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,209 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 208,874 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.