↓ Skip to main content

Syphilis ascendant: a brief history and modern trends

Overview of attention for article published in Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 133)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Syphilis ascendant: a brief history and modern trends
Published in
Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40794-016-0039-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wesley G. Willeford, Laura H. Bachmann

Abstract

To provide a miniature review of recent literature surrounding a brief history of syphilis, to discuss the recently increasing incidence of syphilis, to discuss recent United State Preventative Service Task Force recommendations for syphilis screening, and to discuss congenital syphilis. The literature review was conducting using PubMed with the following search terms: syphilis, congenital syphilis, MSM and syphilis, prenatal syphilis, neurosyphilis, and other related terms. Treponema pallidum has been a constant, and unwanted, companion of humankind since antiquity. This sexually transmitted infection (STI) has the potential to affect virtually every rung of society-young and old, rich and poor, but it has a proclivity for the most vulnerable groups among us. Since record high rates of infection in the World War II era, tremendous progress has been made in effectively controlling the infection, and this has been largely mediated by the efficacy of penicillin on the causative spirochete. However, 2014 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention demonstrated a sharp increase in the rate of new cases of syphilis, predominantly in men who have sex with men. Additionally, the numbers of newly diagnosed cases of congenital syphilis are on the rise as well. In effect, a burgeoning crisis has come to the doorstep of the medical community. We are faced with changing attitudes regarding sexual interactions. The authors believe that geolocation dating and sex applications for smart phones increase the availability of sexual encounters. Pre-exposure prophylaxis may be leading to more laissez-faire attitudes toward unprotected intercourse, and with increased opportunities for sexual encounters, co-infected states with other diseases may be altering the landscape of STIs. In 2016, in response to increasing rates of newly diagnosed syphilis, the United States Preventative Health Services Task Force reaffirmed the need for syphilis screening in at-risk populations. However, primary care physicians and advanced practice providers may not always be aware of which patients fall into that category. Due to the highly personal nature of discussing sexuality, sexual behavior may not be explored at all. Numerous challenges lie ahead of the infectious diseases, primary care, and public health communities in attempting to bend the curve of the ascendant rise in syphilis. To adequately combat this infection, sufficient funding will need to be provided to public health departments, adequate access to health care resources will be needed to allow for the necessary screening of patients, and primary care practitioners will need thoroughly engage with their patients to understand their sexual practices and to offer the necessary interventions.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Postgraduate 11 12%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 29 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 36 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,987,745
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines
#20
of 133 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,214
of 322,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Diseases, Travel Medicine and Vaccines
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 133 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 322,228 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.