↓ Skip to main content

Health care professionals at risk of infection with Borna disease virus – evidence from a large hospital in China (Chongqing)

Overview of attention for article published in Virology Journal, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Health care professionals at risk of infection with Borna disease virus – evidence from a large hospital in China (Chongqing)
Published in
Virology Journal, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12985-015-0239-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xia Liu, Liv Bode, Liang Zhang, Xiao Wang, Siwen Liu, Lujun Zhang, Rongzhong Huang, Mingju Wang, Liu Yang, Shigang Chen, Qi Li, Dan Zhu, Hanns Ludwig, Peng Xie

Abstract

Human Borna disease virus (BDV) infections have recently been reported in China. BDV causes cognitive and behavioural disturbances in animals. The impact on human mental disorders is subject to debate, but previous studies worldwide have found neuropsychiatric patients more frequently infected than healthy controls. A few isolates were recovered from severely depressed patients, but contagiousness of BDV strain remains unknown. We addressed the risk of infection in health care settings at the first affiliated hospital of Chongqing Medical University (CQMU), located in downtown Chongqing, a megacity in Southwest China. Between February 2012 and March 2013, we enrolled 1529 participants, of whom 534 were outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD), 615 were hospital personnel, and 380 were healthy controls who underwent a health check. Infection was determined through BDV-specific circulating immune complexes (CIC), RNA, and selective antibodies (blood). One-fifth of the hospital staff (21.8%) were found to be infected (CIC positive), with the highest prevalence among psychiatry and oncology personnel, which is twice as many as were detected in the healthy control group (11.1%), and exceeds the prevalence detected in MDD patients (18.2%). BDV circulates unnoticed in hospital settings in China, putting medical staff at risk and warranting clarification of infection modes and introduction of prevention measures.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Professor 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 9 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 March 2015.
All research outputs
#4,345,830
of 15,915,969 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#440
of 2,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,439
of 219,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,915,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 219,550 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them