↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense genetic diversity and clinical spectrum among sleeping sickness patients in Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2017
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 (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Relationship between Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense genetic diversity and clinical spectrum among sleeping sickness patients in Uganda
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2860-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles D. Kato, Claire M. Mugasa, Ann Nanteza, Enock Matovu, Vincent P. Alibu

Abstract

Human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) due to Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense in East and southern Africa is reported to be clinically diverse. We tested the hypothesis that this clinical diversity is associated with a variation in trypanosome genotypes. Trypanosome DNA isolated from HAT patients was genotyped using 7 microsatellite markers directly from blood spotted FTA cards following a whole genome amplification. All markers were polymorphic and identified 17 multi-locus genotypes with 56% of the isolates having replicate genotypes. We did not observe any significant clustering between isolates and bootstrap values across major tree nodes were insignificant. When genotypes were compared among patients with varying clinical presentation or outcome, replicate genotypes were observed at both extremes showing no significant association between genetic diversity and clinical outcome. Our study shows that T. b. rhodesiense isolates are homogeneous within a focus and that observed clinical diversity may not be associated with parasite genetic diversity. Other factors like host genetics and environmental factors might be involved in determining clinical diversity. Our study may be important in designing appropriate control measures that target the parasite.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Lecturer 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 6 26%
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 02 November 2017.
All research outputs
#14,957,541
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,145
of 4,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,287
of 328,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#64
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 328,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 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 51% of its contemporaries.