↓ Skip to main content

Chronic HCV infection: epidemiological and clinical relevance

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

1 Wikipedia page


70 Dimensions

Readers on

129 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.
Chronic HCV infection: epidemiological and clinical relevance
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-12-s2-s2
Pubmed ID

S Zaltron, A Spinetti, L Biasi, C Baiguera, F Castelli


Hepatitis C virus (HCV), first recognized as a cause of transfusion-associated acute and chronic hepatitis in 1989, plays a major role as a cause of chronic liver injury, with potential for neoplastic degeneration. It is mainly transmitted by the parenteral route. However, although with lower efficiency, it may be also transmitted by sexual intercourses and by the mother-to-child route. Epidemiological evidence shows that a wave of infection occurred in the 1945-65 period (baby boomers) in western countries. After acute infection, as many as 50-85% of the patients fail to clear the virus resulting in chronic liver infection and/or disease. It is estimated that, on a global scale, about 170 million people are chronically infected with HCV, leading to about 350.000 deaths yearly. Among western countries southern Europe, and particularly Italy, is among the most affected areas. The impact on the public health systems is noteworthy, with high number of hospitalizations due to chronic liver disease, cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. While waiting for a safe and effective vaccine to be made available, new promising direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs offer a better therapeutic scenario than in the past even for the poor responder genotypes 1 and 4, provided that effective screening and care is offered. However, the long and aspecific prodromic period before clinical symptoms develop is a major obstacle to early detection and treatment. Effective screening strategies may target at-risk groups or age specific groups, as recently recommended by the CDC.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Unknown 122 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 24 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 27 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 July 2013.
All research outputs
of 4,692,692 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
of 2,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 158,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,692,692 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,560 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 158,052 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 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.