↓ Skip to main content

A case of conventional treatment failure in visceral leishmaniasis: leukocyte distribution and cytokine expression in splenic compartments

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
A case of conventional treatment failure in visceral leishmaniasis: leukocyte distribution and cytokine expression in splenic compartments
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-14-491
Pubmed ID
Authors

Washington LC dos-Santos, Carla Pagliari, Lina G Santos, Valter A Almeida, Thiago LV e Silva, João de J Coutinho, Tulio Souza, Maria IS Duarte, Luiz AR de Freitas, Carlos HN Costa

Abstract

In this paper we study the distribution of leukocyte populations and of cytokine-producing cells in the spleen of a patient with visceral leishmaniasis resistant to clinical treatment. It is the first attempt to compare the distribution of leukocyte populations and cytokine-producing cells in the splenic compartments of a patient with visceral leishmaniasis with those observed in patients without the disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 12 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 July 2019.
All research outputs
#15,305,567
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#4,451
of 7,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,060
of 238,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#89
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,666 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 238,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.