↓ Skip to main content

Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense infection in a Chinese traveler returning from the Serengeti National Park in Tanzania

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Diseases of Poverty, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense infection in a Chinese traveler returning from the Serengeti National Park in Tanzania
Published in
Infectious Diseases of Poverty, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40249-018-0432-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qin Liu, Xiao-Ling Chen, Mu-Xin Chen, Han-Guo Xie, Qing Liu, Zhu-Yun Chen, Yao-Ying Lin, Hua Zheng, Jia-Xu Chen, Yi Zhang, Xiao-Nong Zhou

Abstract

Human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) is one of the most complex parasitic diseases known to humankind. It usually occurs in endemic areas in Africa, but is occasionally detected in returning travelers and migrants in non-endemic countries. In August 2017, a case of HAT was diagnosed in China in a traveler returning from the Masai Mara area in Kenya and the Serengeti area in Tanzania. The traveler visited Africa from 23 July to 5 August, 2017. Upon return to China, she developed a fever (on 8 August), and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense infection was confirmed by laboratory tests (on 14 August) including observation of parasites in blood films and by polymerase chain reaction. She was treated with pentamidine followed by suramin, and recovered 1 month later. This is the first imported rhodesiense HAT case reported in China. This case alerts clinical and public health workers to be aware of HAT in travelers, and expatriates and migrants who have visited at-risk areas in Africa.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 26%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Professor 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 5 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,454,779
of 15,555,958 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases of Poverty
#192
of 583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,057
of 280,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases of Poverty
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,555,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. 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 280,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them