↓ Skip to main content

Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto and Borrelia garinii DNAs in patient with Hyperkeratosis lenticularis perstans (Flegel disease)

Overview of attention for article published in Folia Microbiologica, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto and Borrelia garinii DNAs in patient with Hyperkeratosis lenticularis perstans (Flegel disease)
Published in
Folia Microbiologica, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12223-016-0444-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katarina Schwarzova, Peter Kozub, Zoltan Szep, Marina Golovchenko, Natasha Rudenko

Abstract

Determination of the causative agent of erythema-like skin lesions in case of nonspecific superficial perivascular dermatitis was supported by histological examination and led to the latter diagnosis of Hyperkeratosis lenticularis perstans (Flegel disease) in patient. The presence of antibodies against Borrelia burgdorferi in patient serum was confirmed by a routine ELISA method and verified by Western blot technique. Skin biopsy and blood specimens were analyzed by PCR and multilocus sequence analysis (MLSA). Western blot method revealed IgG antibody response against two specific antigens, 17 and 83 kDa proteins. The recombinant test detected IgG antibody response against p100 and p41 antigens. The sequence analysis of amplicons from the selected genomic loci obtained from skin biopsy and serum samples revealed the presence of two species from B. burgdorferi sensu lato complex as a co-infection in this patient-B. burgdorferi sensu stricto (s.s.) and Borrelia garinii.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 30%
Librarian 1 10%
Professor 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,471,048
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Folia Microbiologica
#126
of 739 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,575
of 395,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Folia Microbiologica
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 739 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 395,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.