↓ Skip to main content

Infected or not: are PCR-positive oropharyngeal swabs indicative of low pathogenic influenza A virus infection in the respiratory tract of Mallard Anas platyrhynchos?

Overview of attention for article published in Veterinary Research, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Infected or not: are PCR-positive oropharyngeal swabs indicative of low pathogenic influenza A virus infection in the respiratory tract of Mallard Anas platyrhynchos?
Published in
Veterinary Research, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/1297-9716-45-53
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Wille, Peter van Run, Jonas Waldenström, Thijs Kuiken

Abstract

Detection of influenza virus in oropharyngeal swabs collected during wild bird surveillance is assumed to represent respiratory infection, although intestine is the main site of infection. We tested this assumption by histological examination of the respiratory tract of wild Mallards with virus-positive oropharyngeal swabs. Thirty-two of 125 Mallards tested had viral-RNA positive oropharyngeal swabs. The respiratory tracts of four Mallards with the most virus were examined in detail by immunohistochemistry. None had detectable virus antigen in the respiratory tract, suggesting it was not infected. An alternative explanation is that the oropharynx was contaminated with virus through feeding in surface water or through preening.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 44%
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Librarian 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 38%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 June 2014.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Research
#660
of 1,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,051
of 241,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Research
#17
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,337 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 241,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.