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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Investigation of Encephalopathy Caused by Shiga Toxin 2c-Producing Escherichia coli Infection in Mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0058959 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Muhammad Yunus Amran, Jun Fujii, Satoshi O. Suzuki, Glynis L. Kolling, Sharon Y. A. M. Villanueva, Mosaburo Kainuma, Hideyuki Kobayashi, Hideko Kameyama, Shin-ichi Yoshida |
| Abstract |
A large outbreak of Shiga toxin (Stx)-producing enteroaggregative Escherichia coli (EAEC) O104:H4 occurred in northern Germany. From this outbreak, at least 900 patients developed hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), resulting in more than 50 deaths. Thirty percent of the HUS patients showed encephalopathy. We previously established a mouse model with encephalopathy associated with blood brain barrier (BBB) damage after oral infection with the Shiga toxin (Stx) 2c-producing Escherichia coli O157: H- strain E32511 (E32511). In this model, we detected high expression of the Stx receptor synthase enzyme, glycosphingolipid globotriaosylceramide (Gb3) synthase, in endothelial cells (ECs) and neurons in the reticular formation of the medulla oblongata by in situ hybridization. Caspase-3 was activated in neurons in the reticular formation of the medulla oblongata and the anterior horn of the spinal cord. Astrocytes (ASTs) were activated in the medulla oblongata and spinal cord, and a decrease in aquaporin 4 around the ECs suggested that BBB integrity was compromised directly by Stx2c or through the activation of ASTs. We also report the effectiveness of azithromycin (AZM) in our model. Moreover, AZM strongly inhibited the release of Stx2c from E32511 in vitro. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 28% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
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 20 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,271,909
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#130,175
of 193,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,032
of 195,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,316
of 5,426 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 195,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,426 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.