↓ Skip to main content

Increased Severity and Spread ofMycobacterium ulcerans, Southeastern Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Increased Severity and Spread ofMycobacterium ulcerans, Southeastern Australia
Published in
Emerging Infectious Diseases, January 2018
DOI 10.3201/eid2401.171070
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex Y.C. Tai, Eugene Athan, N. Deborah Friedman, Andrew Hughes, Aaron Walton, Daniel P. O’Brien

Abstract

Reported cases of Mycobacterium ulcerans disease (Buruli ulcer) have been increasing in southeastern Australia and spreading into new geographic areas. We analyzed 426 cases of M. ulcerans disease during January 1998-May 2017 in the established disease-endemic region of the Bellarine Peninsula and the emerging endemic region of the Mornington Peninsula. A total of 20.4% of cases-patients had severe disease. Over time, there has been an increase in the number of cases managed per year and the proportion associated with severe disease. Risk factors associated with severe disease included age, time period (range of years of diagnosis), and location of lesions over a joint. We highlight the changing epidemiology and pathogenicity of M. ulcerans disease in Australia. Further research, including genomic studies of emergent strains with increased pathogenicity, are urgently needed to improve the understanding of disease to facilitate implementation of effective public health measures to halt its spread.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Postgraduate 6 16%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 4 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 02 June 2020.
All research outputs
#469,929
of 15,916,110 outputs
Outputs from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#588
of 7,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,792
of 281,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emerging Infectious Diseases
#11
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,916,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,601 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 281,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.