↓ Skip to main content

B. anthracisassociated cardiovascular dysfunction and shock: the potential contribution of both non-toxin and toxin components

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
B. anthracisassociated cardiovascular dysfunction and shock: the potential contribution of both non-toxin and toxin components
Published in
BMC Medicine, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-217
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenneth E Remy, Ping Qiu, Yan Li, Xizhong Cui, Peter Q Eichacker

Abstract

The development of cardiovascular dysfunction and shock in patients with invasive Bacillus anthracis infection has a particularly poor prognosis. Growing evidence indicates that several bacterial components likely play important pathogenic roles in this injury. As with other pathogenic Gram-positive bacteria, the B. anthracis cell wall and its peptidoglycan constituent produce a robust inflammatory response with its attendant tissue injury, disseminated intravascular coagulation and shock. However, B. anthracis also produces lethal and edema toxins that both contribute to shock. Growing evidence suggests that lethal toxin, a metalloprotease, can interfere with endothelial barrier function as well as produce myocardial dysfunction. Edema toxin has potent adenyl cyclase activity and may alter endothelial function, as well as produce direct arterial and venous relaxation. Furthermore, both toxins can weaken host defense and promote infection. Finally, B. anthracis produces non-toxin metalloproteases which new studies show can contribute to tissue injury, coagulopathy and shock. In the future, an understanding of the individual pathogenic effects of these different components and their interactions will be important for improving the management of B. anthracis infection and shock.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 25%
Other 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 2014.
All research outputs
#3,770,795
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,964
of 3,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,119
of 209,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#48
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 209,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.