↓ Skip to main content

A review of canine babesiosis: the European perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
197 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
355 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
A review of canine babesiosis: the European perspective
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1596-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laia Solano-Gallego, Ángel Sainz, Xavier Roura, Agustín Estrada-Peña, Guadalupe Miró

Abstract

Canine babesiosis is a significant tick-borne disease caused by various species of the protozoan genus Babesia. Although it occurs worldwide, data relating to European infections have now been collected for many years. These data have boosted the publication record and increased our working knowledge of these protozoan parasites. Both the large and small forms of Babesia species (B. canis, B. vogeli, B. gibsoni, and B. microti-like isolates also referred to as "B. vulpes" and "Theileria annae") infect dogs in Europe, and their geographical distribution, transmission, clinical signs, treatment, and prognosis vary widely for each species. The goal of this review is to provide veterinary practitioners with practical guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of babesiosis in European dogs. Our hope is that these guidelines will answer the most frequently asked questions posed by veterinary practitioners.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 355 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 352 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 49 14%
Student > Master 48 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 10%
Researcher 31 9%
Other 22 6%
Other 78 22%
Unknown 92 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 133 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 4%
Other 25 7%
Unknown 105 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 13 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,257,782
of 21,322,016 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#443
of 5,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,482
of 280,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,322,016 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 280,955 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 86% 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