↓ Skip to main content

Eradication of Blastocystis Carriage With Antimicrobials: Reality or Delusion?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, February 2010
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Eradication of Blastocystis Carriage With Antimicrobials: Reality or Delusion?
Published in
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, February 2010
DOI 10.1097/mcg.0b013e3181bb86ba
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christen R. Stensvold, Huw V. Smith, Robyn Nagel, Katharina E.P. Olsen, Rebecca J. Traub

Abstract

Metronidazole constitutes a mainstay in the antimicrobial therapy of intestinal protozoa, and is also traditionally considered first-line therapy in cases where there is a requirement to treat Blastocystis, a common protist of disputable clinical significance. Many compounds have been used in attempts to eradicate the parasite, and an accumulating body of data indicates that successful antimicrobial eradication of Blastocystis is far from straightforward. This review focuses on some issues that prevent us from reaching a clear understanding of how to eradicate Blastocystis based on chemotherapeutic intervention, by focusing on conflicting reports on the efficacy of metronidazole and other compounds and study design and data limitations. The review provides a comprehensive overview of antimicrobials used to target Blastocystis, and discusses issues pertaining to drug resistance, treatment failure, and reinfection. Finally, key methodological and molecular diagnostic tools that will assist in the generation of data required to improve current knowledge are identified and discussed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 77 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Other 12 15%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 12 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,260,716
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
#394
of 2,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,299
of 172,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,753 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 172,560 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 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.