| Title |
Epidemiological and molecular characterization of dengue viruses imported into Guangzhou during 2009–2013
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-3257-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yongxia Shi, Shufen Li, Xiaobo Li, Kui Zheng, Shuai Yuan, Jicheng Huang |
| Abstract |
Dengue virus causes one of the most significant infectious diseases in tropical and subtropical regions, notable number of which is imported into China every year. In this study, the molecular epidemiologic and phylogenetic analyses of dengue cases imported into Guangzhou in South China during 2009-2013 were conducted. During that period, 46 imported dengue cases were identified, including four serotypes. Most of the dengue patients were travelling from Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa. The envelope (E) genes of 20 imported dengue viruses introduced from 13 countries and regions, were sequenced and used for phylogenetic analyses. The results indicated that the DENV-1 genotype I and DENV-2 Asian genotype I were the most predominant DENV strains, which were circulating in Southeast Asia and imported into South China. In addition, the new introduction of DENV-3 genotype III from West Asia was observed. This study provided an overview on the genetic diversity of DENV strains imported into South China, and also gave information about the geographic distribution, dynamic transmission and molecular evolution of epidemic DENV strains. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
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 17 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,301
of 1,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,240
of 328,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#135
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 328,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.