↓ Skip to main content

Genetic variants of Dabie bandavirus: classification and biological/clinical implications

Overview of attention for article published in Virology Journal, April 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 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
Genetic variants of Dabie bandavirus: classification and biological/clinical implications
Published in
Virology Journal, April 2023
DOI 10.1186/s12985-023-02033-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bingyan Liu, Jie Zhu, Tengfei He, Zhenhua Zhang

Abstract

Severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) is an emerging infectious disease caused by Dabie bandavirus (DBV), a novel Bandavirus in the family Phenuiviridae. The first case of SFTS was reported in China, followed by cases in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam. With clinical manifestations including fever, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and gastrointestinal symptoms, SFTS has a fatality rate of approximately 10%. In recent years, an increasing number of viral strains have been isolated and sequenced, and several research groups have attempted to classify the different genotypes of DBV. Additionally, accumulating evidence indicates certain correlations between the genetic makeup and biological/clinical manifestations of the virus. Here, we attempted to evaluate the genetic classification of different groups, align the genotypic nomenclature in different studies, summarize the distribution of different genotypes, and review the biological and clinical implications of DBV genetic variations.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 33%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
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 April 2023.
All research outputs
#15,011,665
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#1,462
of 3,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,993
of 419,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#30
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 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 3,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 419,464 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.