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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
SEROLOGICAL SURVEY OF Ehrlichia SPECIES IN DOGS, HORSES AND HUMANS: ZOONOTIC SCENERY IN A RURAL SETTLEMENT FROM SOUTHERN BRAZIL
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1590/s0036-46652013000500007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rafael Felipe da Costa Vieira, Thállitha Samih Wischral Jayme Vieira, Denise do Amaral Gomes Nascimento, Thiago F. Martins, Felipe S. Krawczak, Marcelo B. Labruna, Ramaswamy Chandrashekar, Mary Marcondes, Alexander Welker Biondo, Odilon Vidotto |
| Abstract |
The aims of this study were to determine the seroprevalence of Ehrlichia spp. and risk factors for exposure in a restricted population of dogs, horses, and humans highly exposed to tick bites in a Brazilian rural settlement using a commercial ELISA rapid test and two indirect immunofluorescent assays (IFA) with E. canis and E. chaffeensis crude antigens. Serum samples from 132 dogs, 16 horses and 100 humans were used. Fifty-six out of 132 (42.4%) dogs were seropositive for E. canis. Dogs > one year were more likely to be seropositive for E. canis than dogs ≤ one year (p = 0.0051). Ten/16 (62.5%) and 8/16 (50%) horses were seropositive by the commercial ELISA and IFA, respectively. Five out of 100 (5%) humans were seropositive for E. canis and E. chaffeensis. Rhipicephalus sanguineus (n = 291, 97.98%) on dogs and Amblyomma cajennense (n = 25, 96.15%) on horses were the most common ticks found. In conclusion, anti-Ehrlichia spp. antibodies were found in horses; however, the lack of a molecular characterization precludes any conclusion regarding the agent involved. Additionally, the higher seroprevalence of E. canis in dogs and the evidence of anti-Ehrlichia spp. antibodies in humans suggest that human cases of ehrlichiosis in Brazil might be caused by E. canis, or other closely related species. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 1 | 2% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 2% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 2% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 59 | 92% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 92% |
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 2013.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo
#565
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,819
of 288,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 288,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.