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 |
First report on Babesia cf. microti infection of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) from Hungary
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-015-0660-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Róbert Farkas, Nóra Takács, Ákos Hornyák, Yaarit Nachum-Biala, Sándor Hornok, Gad Baneth |
| Abstract |
BackgroundTo date, only one report of a small Babesia infection based on microscopic observation which caused babesiosis in two dogs in Hungary has been published. Babesiosis due to Babesia canis - which is endemic in the local dogs - has only been detected in captive grey wolves. No information is available on babesial/theilerial infections in red foxes in Hungary. The aim of the study was to screen red foxes in Hungary for babesial parasites by PCR and to compare their partial 18S rRNA gene sequences to those parasites of domestic dogs and wild canids from other countries.MethodsBlood samples of 404 red foxes originating from 316 locations representing all 19 Hungarian counties were screened in Hungary for babesial parasites by PCR and the partial 18S rRNA gene sequences were compared to those parasites of domestic dogs and wild canids from other countries.ResultsAltogether 81 red foxes out of 404 (20.0%; 95% CI: 16.4¿24.2%) shot in 74 locations and in 17 of the 19 Hungarian counties were found to be infected with Babesia cf. microti by PCR.ConclusionsThis is the first report to demonstrate the occurrence of Babesia cf. microti in Hungary, and its widespread presence in the fox population throughout the country. Further studies are needed to identify the tick species involved in its transmission, and whether other mechanisms of transmission are involved in its spread in fox populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hungary | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 25% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 17 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 March 2015.
All research outputs
#7,959,659
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,854
of 5,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,518
of 360,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#31
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 360,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.