↓ Skip to main content

Etiology of respiratory tract infections in the community and clinic in Ilorin, Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Etiology of respiratory tract infections in the community and clinic in Ilorin, Nigeria
Published in
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-3063-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olatunji Kolawole, Michael Oguntoye, Tina Dam, Rumi Chunara

Abstract

Recognizing increasing interest in community disease surveillance globally, the goal of this study was to investigate whether respiratory viruses circulating in the community may be represented through clinical (hospital) surveillance in Nigeria. Children were selected via convenience sampling from communities and a tertiary care center (n = 91) during spring 2017 in Ilorin, Nigeria. Nasal swabs were collected and tested using polymerase chain reaction. The majority (79.1%) of subjects were under 6 years old, of whom 46 were infected (63.9%). A total of 33 of the 91 subjects had one or more respiratory tract virus; there were 10 cases of triple infection and 5 of quadruple. Parainfluenza virus 4, respiratory syncytial virus B and enterovirus were the most common viruses in the clinical sample; present in 93.8% (15/16) of clinical subjects, and 6.7% (5/75) of community subjects (significant difference, p < 0.001). Coronavirus OC43 was the most common virus detected in community members (13.3%, 10/75). A different strain, Coronavirus OC 229 E/NL63 was detected among subjects from the clinic (2/16) and not detected in the community. This pilot study provides evidence that data from the community can potentially represent different information than that sourced clinically, suggesting the need for community surveillance to enhance public health efforts and scientific understanding of respiratory infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 13%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Other 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 20 33%

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 05 May 2020.
All research outputs
#3,158,894
of 18,658,444 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#479
of 3,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,350
of 424,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#50
of 424 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,658,444 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,829 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 424,651 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 424 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.