↓ Skip to main content

Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella in sickle cell disease in Africa: is increased gut permeability the missing link?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella in sickle cell disease in Africa: is increased gut permeability the missing link?
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12967-018-1622-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seah H. Lim, Barbara A. Methé, Bettina M. Knoll, Alison Morris, Stephen K. Obaro

Abstract

Non-typhoidal Salmonella usually induces self-limiting gastroenteritis. However, in many parts of Africa, especially in individuals who are malnourished, infected with malaria, or have sickle cell disease, the organism causes serious and potentially fatal systemic infections. Since the portal of entry of non-typhoidal Salmonella into the systemic circulation is by way of the intestine, we argue that an increased gut permeability plays a vital role in the initiation of invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella in these patients. Here, we will appraise the evidence supporting a breach in the intestinal barrier and propose the mechanisms for the increased risks for invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella infections in these individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 10 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 10 May 2022.
All research outputs
#3,446,283
of 24,093,053 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#584
of 4,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,249
of 338,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#14
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,093,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,282 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 338,103 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.