↓ Skip to main content

First Evidence of Simultaneous Circulation of Three Different Dengue Virus Serotypes in Africa

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
109 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.
Article details
Title
First Evidence of Simultaneous Circulation of Three Different Dengue Virus Serotypes in Africa
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0078030
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie Caron, Gilda Grard, Christophe Paupy, Illich Mamfred Mombo, Branly Bikie Bi Nso, Fabrice Roland Kassa Kassa, Dieudonne Nkoghe, Eric Maurice Leroy

Abstract

Gabon, in Central Africa, was affected for the first time in 2007 and then in 2010 by simultaneous outbreaks of chikungunya and Dengue serotype 2 (DENV-2) viruses. Through the national surveillance of dengue-like syndromes between 2007 and 2010, we observed continuous circulation of DENV-2 in a southward movement. This rapid spread of DENV-2 was associated with the emergence of DENV-1 in 2007 and DENV-3 in 2010. Interestingly, we detected six DENV-2 infected patients with hemorrhagic signs during the second outbreak in 2010. Although these cases do not meet all standard WHO criteria for severe Dengue with hemorrhage (formerly DHF), this is the first report of several dengue fever cases associated with hemorrhagic signs during a simultaneous circulation of different DENV serotypes in Africa. Together, these findings suggest that DENV is becoming more widely established on this continent and that DHF will likely become a serious public-health problem in the near future.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Nigeria 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 104 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 22 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 28 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2015.
All research outputs
#11,899,738
of 34,358,242 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#103,453
of 224,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,740
of 260,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,692
of 5,720 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,358,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 260,226 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,720 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.