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 |
Recurrent bilateral Mycobacterium bovis necrotizing epididymitis: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-018-3426-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Simon Grandjean-Lapierre, Simon-Djamel Thiberville, Mustapha Fellag, Christophe Eghazarian, Feriel Bouzid, Christina Gavril, Michel Drancourt |
| Abstract |
Mycobacterium bovis causing tuberculosis in animals is responsible for zoonotic tuberculosis in patients. Veterinary control measures and milk pasteurization has led to a significant decrease in human cases of M. bovis infections in developed countries. We diagnosed recurrent M. bovis epididymitis in a 63-year old Caucasian man without any signs of pulmonary or disseminated disease. Relevant epidemiological expositions included camel milk drinking during prolonged travels in Niger, prior to initial clinical manifestations. The diagnosis was firmly established by mass spectrometry and DNA sequencing on epididymis surgical biopsy specimens. We detail therapeutic management which included surgical epididymectomy and hydrocele repair. As for other M. tuberculosis complex species, the genitourinary tract represents a frequent site of secondary dissemination and latency for M. bovis. Isolated epididymis infection is a newly documented manifestation of M. bovis disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 19% |
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
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 20 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,497,162
of 23,061,402 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,583
of 4,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,009
of 329,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#84
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,061,402 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 329,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.