↓ Skip to main content

High prevalence of hepatitis B virus dual infection with genotypes A and G in HIV-1 infected men in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, during 2000-2011

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
High prevalence of hepatitis B virus dual infection with genotypes A and G in HIV-1 infected men in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, during 2000-2011
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-13-540
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antoinette C van der Kuyl, Fokla Zorgdrager, Boris Hogema, Margreet Bakker, Suzanne Jurriaans, Nicole KT Back, Ben Berkhout, Hans L Zaaijer, Marion Cornelissen

Abstract

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is divided into 8 definite (A-H) and 2 putative (I, J) genotypes that show a geographical distribution. HBV genotype G, however, is an aberrant genotype of unknown origin that demonstrates severe replication deficiencies and very little genetic variation. It is often found in co-infections with another HBV genotype and infection has been associated with certain risk groups such as intravenous drug users and men having sex with men (MSM). We aimed to estimate the prevalence of HBV-G in the Netherlands by analysing samples from HBV-positive patients visiting the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam.

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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 5 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,525,253
of 23,885,338 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,717
of 8,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,629
of 216,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#52
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,885,338 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 216,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 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 59% of its contemporaries.