↓ Skip to main content

Brucellosis caused by the wood rat pathogen Brucella neotomae: two case reports

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Brucellosis caused by the wood rat pathogen Brucella neotomae: two case reports
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13256-017-1496-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan M. Villalobos-Vindas, Ernesto Amuy, Elías Barquero-Calvo, Norman Rojas, Carlos Chacón-Díaz, Esteban Chaves-Olarte, Caterina Guzman-Verri, Edgardo Moreno

Abstract

Brucellosis is a chronic bacterial disease caused by members of the genus Brucella. Among the classical species stands Brucella neotomae, until now, a pathogen limited to wood rats. However, we have identified two brucellosis human cases caused by B. neotomae, demonstrating that this species has zoonotic potential. Within almost 4 years of each other, a 64-year-old Costa Rican white Hispanic man and a 51-year-old Costa Rican white Hispanic man required medical care at public hospitals of Costa Rica. Their hematological and biochemical parameters were within normal limits. No adenopathies or visceral abnormalities were found. Both patients showed intermittent fever, disorientation, and general malaise and a positive Rose Bengal test compatible with Brucella infection. Blood and cerebrospinal fluid cultures rendered Gram-negative coccobacilli identified by genomic analysis as B. neotomae. After antibiotic treatment, the patients recovered with normal mental activities. This is the first report describing in detail the clinical disease caused by B. neotomae in two unrelated patients. In spite of previous claims, this bacterium keeps zoonotic potential. Proposals to generate vaccines by using B. neotomae as an immunogen must be reexamined and countries housing the natural reservoir must consider the zoonotic risk.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 26%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 2 5%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 10 23%
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 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,370,803
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,116
of 3,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,948
of 440,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#20
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,945 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 440,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.