| Title |
Infectious Dose of <em>Listeria monocytogenes</em> in Outbreak Linked to Ice Cream, United States, 2015 - Volume 22, Number 12—December 2016 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Emerging Infectious Diseases, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3201/eid2212.160165 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Régis Pouillot, Karl C. Klontz, Yi Chen, Laurel S. Burall, Dumitru Macarisin, Matthew Doyle, Kären M. Bally, Errol Strain, Atin R. Datta, Thomas S. Hammack, Jane M. Van Doren |
| Abstract |
The relationship between the number of ingested Listeria monocytogenes cells in food and the likelihood of developing listeriosis is not well understood. Data from an outbreak of listeriosis linked to milkshakes made from ice cream produced in 1 factory showed that contaminated products were distributed widely to the public without any reported cases, except for 4 cases of severe illness in persons who were highly susceptible. The ingestion of high doses of L. monocytogenes by these patients infected through milkshakes was unlikely if possible additional contamination associated with the preparation of the milkshake is ruled out. This outbreak illustrated that the vast majority of the population did not become ill after ingesting a low level of L. monocytogenes but raises the question of listeriosis cases in highly susceptible persons after distribution of low-level contaminated products that did not support the growth of this pathogen. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 42% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Nepal | 1 | 4% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| Israel | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 21% |
| Scientists | 5 | 21% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 151 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 15% |
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 42 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 44 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 12% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 10 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 6% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 54 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 14 December 2022.
All research outputs
#921,065
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#1,088
of 9,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,406
of 423,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#12
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,860 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 423,208 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 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 90% of its contemporaries.