↓ Skip to main content

Identification of enteric viruses circulating in a dog population with low vaccine coverage

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Identification of enteric viruses circulating in a dog population with low vaccine coverage
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, March 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.bjm.2018.02.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian D.B.T. Alves, Oscar F.O. Granados, Renata da F. Budaszewski, André F. Streck, Matheus N. Weber, Samuel P. Cibulski, Luciane D. Pinto, Nilo Ikuta, Cláudio W. Canal

Abstract

Although the use of vaccines has controlled enteric diseases in dogs in many developed countries, vaccine coverage is still under optimal situation in Brazil. There is a large population of nonimmunized dogs and few studies about the identification of the viruses associated with diarrhea. To address this situation, stool samples from 325 dogs were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction for the detection of common enteric viruses such as Canine adenovirus (CAdV), Canine coronavirus (CCoV), Canine distemper virus (CDV), Canine rotavirus (CRV) and Carnivorous protoparvovirus 1 (canine parvovirus 2; CPV-2). At least one of these species was detected in 56.6% (184/325) of the samples. The viruses detected most frequently in either diarrheic or nondiarrheic dog feces were CPV-2 (54.3% of the positive samples), CDV (45.1%) and CCoV (30.4%), followed by CRV (8.2%) and CAdV (4.9%). Only one agent was detected in the majority of the positive samples (63%), but co-infections were present in 37% of the positive samples and mainly included CDV and CPV-2. The data presented herein can improve the clinical knowledge in regions with low vaccine coverage and highlight the need to improve the methods used to control these infectious diseases in domestic dogs.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Other 8 8%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 33 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 21 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 36 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 March 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#1,047
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,964
of 351,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#32
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 351,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.