↓ Skip to main content

Additional Evaluation of the Point-of-Contact Circulating Cathodic Antigen Assay for Schistosoma mansoni Infection

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Additional Evaluation of the Point-of-Contact Circulating Cathodic Antigen Assay for Schistosoma mansoni Infection
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00048
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pauline N. M. Mwinzi, Nupur Kittur, Elizabeth Ochola, Philip J. Cooper, Carl H. Campbell, Charles H. King, Daniel G. Colley

Abstract

Studies of the urine-based point-of-contact cathodic circulating antigen test (POC-CCA) in Schistosoma mansoni-endemic settings in Africa indicate it has good sensitivity in detecting infections, but in areas of low prevalence, the POC-CCA can be positive for persons who are egg-negative by Kato-Katz stool assays. We examined the POC-CCA assay for: (a) batch-to-batch stability; (b) intra-reader and inter-reader variability; (c) day-to-day variability compared to Kato-Katz stool assays, and (d) to see if praziquantel (PZQ) treatment converted Kato-Katz-negative/POC-CCA positive individuals to POC-CCA negativity. We found essentially no batch-to-batch variation, negligible intra-reader variability (2%), and substantial agreement for inter-reader reliability. Some day-to-day variation was observed over 5 days of urine collection, but less than the variation in Kato-Katz stool assays over 3 days. To evaluate the effect of treatment on Kato-Katz(-)/POC-CCA(+) children, 149 children in an area of 10-15% prevalence who were Kato-Katz(-) based on 3 stool samples but POC-CCA(+) were enrolled. Seven days after treatment (PZQ 40 mg/kg) samples were again collected and tested. Almost half (47%) POC-CCA positive children turned negative. Those still POC-CCA positive received a second treatment, and 34% of them turned POC-CCA negative upon this second treatment. Most who remained POC-CCA positive shifted each time to a "lesser" POC-CCA "level of positivity." The data suggest that most Kato-Katz-negative/POC-CCA positive individuals harbor low-intensity infections, and each treatment kills all or some of their adult worms. The data also suggest that when evaluated by a more sensitive assay, the effective cure rates for PZQ are significantly less than those inferred from fecal testing. These findings have public health significance for the mapping and monitoring of Schistosoma infections and in planning the transition from schistosomiasis morbidity control to elimination of transmission.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Kenya 1 1%
Unknown 70 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Other 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 18 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 22 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,281,536
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,008
of 9,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,850
of 263,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#17
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 263,733 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 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.