↓ Skip to main content

Isolation of Chlamydia abortus from a laboratory worker diagnosed with atypical pneumonia

Overview of attention for article published in Irish Veterinary Journal, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Isolation of Chlamydia abortus from a laboratory worker diagnosed with atypical pneumonia
Published in
Irish Veterinary Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13620-016-0067-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nieves Ortega, M. Rosa Caro, M. Carmen Gallego, Antonio Murcia-Belmonte, Daniel Álvarez, Laura del Río, Francisco Cuello, Antonio J. Buendía, Jesús Salinas

Abstract

Identifying the aetiological agent of atypical pneumonia in human can sometimes be a tedious process, especially in cases where Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella species and Chlamydia pneumoniae are ruled out. In such cases, a correct anamnesis of the patient is basic to clarify which pathogens might have produced the infection. For this reason, health professionals including veterinarians and laboratory personnel working with zoonotic pathogens should keep their doctors informed. A human case of atypical pneumonia linked to Chlamydia abortus is reported. A 47-year-old male, a veterinarian researcher into chlamydiae, developed respiratory symptoms, breathing problems and high fever. Serological analyses ruled out the involvement of several respiratory pathogens, such as M. pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, Rickettsia conorii and C. pneumoniae, and Chlamydia abortus was identified as the possible aetiological agent of the infection. The isolation of C. abortus from the patient's sputum and subsequent molecular analysis confirmed the presence of this microorganism. As far as we know, although C. abortus has not been previously described as capable of causing pneumonia in humans, this is the first reported case of atypical pneumonia in which C. abortus is thought to have played an aetiological role.

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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 35%
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 27 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Irish Veterinary Journal
#188
of 257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,391
of 377,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Irish Veterinary Journal
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 257 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 377,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.