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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Probable chronic renal failure caused by Lonomia caterpillar envenomation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1678-9199-19-14 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Poliana Schmitberger, Tássia Fernandes, Robson Santos, Rafael de Assis, Andréia Gomes, Priscila Siqueira, Rodrigo Vitorino, Eduardo de Mendonça, Maria Goreti de Almeida Oliveira, Rodrigo Siqueira-Batista |
| Abstract |
Erucism is a skin reaction to envenomation from certain poisonous caterpillar bristles. In Brazil, most reports of erucism provoked by Lonomia caterpillars are from the southern region. Most manifestations of erucism are local and include burning pain, itching, local hyperthermia and, rarely, blisters (benign symptoms with spontaneous regression in a few hours). General symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, headache, fever, myalgia, abdominal pain and conjunctivitis may also occur. Uncommon symptoms include arthritis, coagulation disorders (manifested as bruising and bleeding), intracerebral hemorrhage and acute renal failure, which comprise serious complications. The present study reports the case of 60-year-old patient from Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil, who came into contact with a caterpillar and developed, a few days later, chronic renal disease. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,913,922
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases
#41
of 484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,053
of 280,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases
#7
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 484 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 280,737 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.