| Title |
Human infection by a “fish tapeworm”, Diphyllobothrium latum, in a non-endemic country
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Infection, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s15010-013-0491-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. G. Esteban, C. Muñoz-Antoli, M. Borras, J. Colomina, R. Toledo |
| Abstract |
We document a case of locally acquired "broad- or fish-tapeworm" infection caused by Diphyllobothrium latum in a 27-year-old Spanish man, confirmed by molecular analysis (COI gene). The patient had naturally expelled a worm of 110 cm in length, but the physical examination did not yield any remarkable findings, and the patient did not suffer from any particular symptoms. Laboratory test results were normal except for a remarkable increase in the red blood cell count, and an evident decrease in the mean corpuscular volume and mean corpuscular hemoglobin. Vitamin B12 and folic acid values were in the normal range without signs of anemia. It was suggested that these anomalies in erythrocyte formation might not be related to the parasite, and analysis of the patient's anamnestic data revealed that the infection could only have been caused by the ingestion of imported fish, although no light could be shed on the specific source of infection. From a public health viewpoint, this human case of fish-borne zoonosis is exemplary, suggesting that not only is control of fish and fish product quality essential, but also increased awareness of the general population with regard to changes in culinary habits. |
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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 23% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 30% |
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 23 September 2014.
All research outputs
#20,237,640
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Infection
#1,244
of 1,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,434
of 198,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infection
#17
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 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 1,401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. 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 198,076 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 19 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.