| Title |
Manifestation of anaplasmosis as cerebral infarction: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-018-3321-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Seok Won Kim, Choon-Mee Kim, Dong-Min Kim, Na Ra Yun |
| Abstract |
Human granulocytic anaplasmosis is a tick-borne zoonotic disease caused by Anaplasma phagocytophilum, an obligate intracellular granulocytotropic bacterium. A 70-year-old female patient was admitted with the clinical signs of fever and an altered state of consciousness 1 week after experiencing a tick bite while planting lawn grass. Magnetic resonance imaging, performed at the time of admission, indicated cerebral infarction in the left basal ganglia, whereas increasing immunofluorescence assay antibody titers for A. phagocytophilum were also documented. A. phagocytophilum was identified using groEL and ankA targeted polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. Because of severe thrombocytopenia, only doxycycline was administered, without any antiplatelet agents. Subsequently, the symptoms improved without any focal neurologic sequela. This is the first reported case of cerebral infarction occurrence in an anaplasmosis patient. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 39% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 6% |
| Norway | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 61% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 17% |
| Scientists | 2 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 17% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 04 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,247,705
of 23,907,431 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#648
of 7,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,904
of 335,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#19
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,907,431 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. 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 335,876 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 176 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.