↓ Skip to main content

Current Concepts in Medical Research and Practice

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 79: Benign Acute Childhood Myositis During Influenza B Outbreak
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Chapter title
Benign Acute Childhood Myositis During Influenza B Outbreak
Chapter number 79
Book title
Current Concepts in Medical Research and Practice
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/5584_2017_79
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-974149-9, 978-3-31-974150-5
Authors

L. Szenborn, K. Toczek-Kubicka, J. Zaryczański, M. Marchewka-Kowalik, K. Miśkiewicz, E. Kuchar, Szenborn, L., Toczek-Kubicka, K., Zaryczański, J., Marchewka-Kowalik, M., Miśkiewicz, K., Kuchar, E.

Abstract

Benign acute childhood myositis (BACM) is a syndrome classically occurring in children during the convalescent phase from a febrile upper respiratory tract infection, most commonly after influenza B. BACM can cause difficulty walking due to severe calf pain. Laboratory results show increased serum creatinine kinase and AST. Although alarming, BACM is self-limiting with symptoms disappearing within a week. Herein, we described a case series of BCAM in children in two cities in Poland during the influenza outbreaks in 2012/2013 and 2014/2015. We discussed the presentation and the clinical workup and examinations of the myositic syndrome. In addition, we evaluated the association of BACM with influenza B. We detected specific IgG against influenza B virus in 83% of the children diagnosed with BCAM. Reports from the National Institute of Public Health - National Institute of Hygiene in Warsaw, Poland confirmed a high rate of influenza B cases during both epidemic seasons in question.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 35%
Student > Master 3 15%
Other 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 5 25%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 4 20%
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 22 December 2022.
All research outputs
#18,881,258
of 23,394,907 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,376
of 5,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#313,568
of 423,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#336
of 490 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,394,907 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 5,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 423,192 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 490 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.