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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Highly suspected cases of salmonellosis in two cats fed with a commercial raw meat-based diet: health risks to animals and zoonotic implications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-017-1143-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Federica Giacometti, Jacopo Magarotto, Andrea Serraino, Silvia Piva |
| Abstract |
Feeding raw meat-based diets (RMBD) to companion animals raises public health concerns for both animals and humans. While considerable attention has been paid to bacterial contamination of commercial pet food, few literature studies have investigated foodborne disease in companion animals. Salmonellosis is reported to be infrequent in cats but no known data or studies estimating feline salmonellosis are available or large-scale epidemiological studies assessing Salmonella risk factors. Two highly suspected cases of salmonellosis in two cats fed with a commercial frozen poultry RMBD are presented, for the first time from the same household. The clinical presentation, diagnostics, treatment and follow-up are reported and the zoonotic implications are discussed. This case highlights the health risks posed to both animals and owners by feeding RMBD to pets, and suggests that these risks should be considered by veterinary practitioners. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Italy | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 92 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 18% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 25 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 31 | 34% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 34% |
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 04 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,621,455
of 25,578,098 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#321
of 3,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,793
of 327,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#13
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,578,098 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,320 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 327,004 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 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.