↓ Skip to main content

Risk Factors for Human Brucellosis in Northern Tanzania

Overview of attention for article published in The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
32 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
160 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
Risk Factors for Human Brucellosis in Northern Tanzania
Published in
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, December 2017
DOI 10.4269/ajtmh.17-0125
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Little is known about the epidemiology of human brucellosis in sub-Saharan Africa. This hampers prevention and control efforts at the individual and population levels. To evaluate risk factors for brucellosis in northern Tanzania, we conducted a study of patients presenting with fever to two hospitals in Moshi, Tanzania. Serum taken at enrollment and at 4-6 week follow-up was tested by Brucella microagglutination test. Among participants with a clinically compatible illness, confirmed brucellosis cases were defined as having a ≥ 4-fold rise in agglutination titer between paired sera or a blood culture positive for Brucella spp., and probable brucellosis cases were defined as having a single reciprocal titer ≥ 160. Controls had reciprocal titers < 20 in paired sera. We collected demographic and clinical information and administered a risk factor questionnaire. Of 562 participants in the analysis, 50 (8.9%) had confirmed or probable brucellosis. Multivariable analysis showed that risk factors for brucellosis included assisting goat or sheep births (Odds ratio [OR] 5.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4, 24.6) and having contact with cattle (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0, 1.4). Consuming boiled or pasteurized dairy products was protective against brucellosis (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02, 0.93). No participants received a clinical diagnosis of brucellosis from their healthcare providers. The under-recognition of brucellosis by healthcare workers could be addressed with clinician education and better access to brucellosis diagnostic tests. Interventions focused on protecting livestock keepers, especially those who assist goat or sheep births, are needed.

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 profiles of 32 X users 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 160 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 %
Unknown 160 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Master 18 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Lecturer 6 4%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 60 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 26 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 65 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,815,751
of 34,205,147 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
#450
of 11,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,813
of 492,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
#7
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,205,147 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 492,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 94% of its contemporaries.