↓ Skip to main content

Diffuse and disseminated cutaneous leishmaniasis: clinical cases experienced in Ecuador and a brief review

Overview of attention for article published in Tropical Medicine and Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Diffuse and disseminated cutaneous leishmaniasis: clinical cases experienced in Ecuador and a brief review
Published in
Tropical Medicine and Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41182-016-0002-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshihisa Hashiguchi, Eduardo L. Gomez, Hirotomo Kato, Luiggi R. Martini, Lenin N. Velez, Hiroshi Uezato

Abstract

In Ecuador, cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is prevalent countrywide, but only one case of diffuse-CL and two cases of disseminated-CL were experienced during our research activities more than 30 years from 1982 to date. These three patients suffered from multiple lesions distributed at a wide range of the body surface, revealing difficulty to clinically differentiate each other. There is a considerable confusion of the use and/or differentiation of the terminologies (terms) between the two disease forms, diffuse-CL and disseminated-CL. One of the aims of the present study is to clarify the difference between the two disease forms, mainly based on the cases experienced in Ecuador. The disseminated-CL case newly reported here was clinically very similar to the diffuse-CL case, but the former showed the following marked differences from the latter: (1) the organisms isolated were identified as the parasites of Leishmania (Viannia) guyanensis/panamensis, which are also known as the causative agents of disseminated-CL in different endemic countries of the New World; (2) the patient was sensitive against antimonials; and (3) mucosal involvement was observed, which is never observed in diffuse-CL. In the text, three clinical cases, one diffuse-CL and two disseminated-CL, were presented. Furthermore, a bibliographic comparison of the features between the two disease forms was made, and a brief comment was also given.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Unknown 138 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 20%
Student > Bachelor 17 12%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Other 25 18%
Unknown 33 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 9%
Unspecified 3 2%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 40 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Medicine and Health
#181
of 441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,543
of 314,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Medicine and Health
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 314,537 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.