↓ Skip to main content

Chronic Cystoisospora belli infection in an immunocompetent Myanmar refugee – microscopy is not sensitive enough

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Chronic Cystoisospora belli infection in an immunocompetent Myanmar refugee – microscopy is not sensitive enough
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1558-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sze-Ann Woon, Rongchang Yang, Una Ryan, Peter Boan, David Prentice

Abstract

Cystoisosporiasis is an opportunistic infection seen more commonly in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Although uncommon, Cystoisospora infection can occur in immunocompetent individuals but tend to be benign and self-limiting. Chronic infection however, has been described but diagnosis can often be challenging and requires a high clinical index of suspicion. We present a case of delayed diagnosis of Cystoisospora belli (C. belli) in an immunocompetent 28-year-old refugee from Myanmar. She had a history of chronic diarrhea where exhaustive investigations over many years failed to reveal a diagnosis. Cystoisospora belli cysts were finally detected in stool 4 years after investigation commenced, and PCR testing on stored colon biopsies amplified a molecular product with 99 % sequence homology to C. belli. The patient improved promptly with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole treatment. In the appropriate clinical context we suggest molecular testing for C. belli or an empirical therapeutic trial.

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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 21%
Student > Master 6 16%
Other 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 14 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,461,618
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,615
of 7,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,956
of 333,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#114
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 333,164 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.