| Title |
From dengue to Zika: the wide spread of mosquito-borne arboviruses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-018-3375-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shivani Sukhralia, Mansi Verma, Shruthi Gopirajan, P. S. Dhanaraj, Rup Lal, Neeti Mehla, Chhaya Ravi Kant |
| Abstract |
The worldwide invasion of arthropod-borne viruses (arboviruses) in recent decades is responsible for emerging public health threats. Some factors like climate change, urbanisation and uncontrolled population growth are fuelling their widespread. Arboviruses incorporate a vast collection of genetically diverse viral pathogens including that of dengue, Zika and chikungunya. These viruses are peculiar as they are zoonotic and are a serious harm to the society, with no particular therapy to neutralise their effect. So it is the need of the hour to develop an effective treatment against infections caused by them. This review focuses on some of the common families of mosquito-borne arboviruses and their most known members that are a threat to mankind and discusses their genome organisation, worldwide spread and negative influence on public health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 2 | 17% |
| Portugal | 1 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 8% |
| Brazil | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Germany | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 67% |
| Scientists | 4 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 152 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 17% |
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 13% |
| Unknown | 41 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 20% |
| Unknown | 46 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 19 November 2020.
All research outputs
#2,532,721
of 25,164,268 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#160
of 2,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,826
of 347,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#5
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,164,268 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 2,980 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 347,940 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.