↓ Skip to main content

Case report: detection of the identical virus in a patient presenting with severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome encephalopathy and the tick that bit her

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Case report: detection of the identical virus in a patient presenting with severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome encephalopathy and the tick that bit her
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-018-3092-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Uh. Jin Kim, Dong-Min Kim, Seong Eun Kim, Seung Ji Kang, Hee-Chang Jang, Kyung-Hwa Park, Sook In Jung

Abstract

Severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) is an emerging tick-borne disease. Haemophysalis longicornis ticks have been considered the vector of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome virus (SFTSV). However, clear data on the transmission of SFTS from ticks to humans are limited. We report an 84-year-old woman who presented with fever and altered mentality, which was confirmed as SFTS with encephalopathy by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction in blood and cerebrospinal fluid. The SFTSV was also identified in the tick that bit her, H. longicornis. Phylogenetic analyses indicated that the SFTSV from the patient and the tick was identical. The patient gradually recovered with treatments of corticosteroids and immunoglobulin. These findings provide further evidence of SFTS viral transmission from H. longicornis to human.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,603,172
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,660
of 7,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,819
of 327,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#98
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 327,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.