↓ Skip to main content

USE OF LOPINAVIR/RITONAVIR ASSOCIATED WITH ERGOTAMINE RESULTING IN FOOT AMPUTATION: BRIEF COMMUNICATION

Overview of attention for article published in Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 785)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
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.
Title
USE OF LOPINAVIR/RITONAVIR ASSOCIATED WITH ERGOTAMINE RESULTING IN FOOT AMPUTATION: BRIEF COMMUNICATION
Published in
Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo, January 2014
DOI 10.1590/s0036-46652014000300013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Raphael de Almeida Ferry, Guilherme Almeida Rosa Da Silva, Rogerio Neves Motta, Ricardo de Souza Carvalho, Carlos Alberto Morais De Sá

Abstract

A 32-year-old female, was diagnosed in 2004 with a C1 HIV1 infection, using zidovudine/lamivudine 300/150 mg BID and lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100 mg BID, in addition to prophylaxis with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 800/160 mg QD, but no prophylaxis with macrolide antibiotics. The patient presented with a severe headache and was prescribed two capsules of the anti-migraine drug Ormigrein™, which contained ergotamine tartrate 1 mg, caffeine 100 mg, paracetamol 220 mg, hyoscyamine sulfate 87.5 mcg, and atropine sulfate 12.5 mcg. Afterwards she was prescribed one capsule of Ormigrein every 30 minutes for a total of six capsules a day. The patient took the medication as prescribed but developed a pain in her left ankle three days later, which evolved to the need for amputation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 33%
Unknown 4 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 1 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%
Unknown 4 67%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,301,033
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo
#44
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,496
of 319,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo
#7
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. 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 319,280 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 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.