| Title |
Control of Drug-Resistant Pathogens in Endemic Settings: Contact Precautions, Controversies, and a Proposal for a Less Restrictive Alternative
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Infectious Disease Reports, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11908-012-0299-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gonzalo Bearman, Michael P. Stevens |
| Abstract |
Contact precautions are routinely employed for the control of multidrug-resistant organisms. Robust measures, however, for the incremental benefit of contact precautions, gowns, gloves, and active detection and isolation strategies for the prevention of cross-transmission in endemic settings are lacking. Unintended consequences and adverse effects from contact precautions, including patient dissatisfaction with care, depression, medication errors, and fewer provider visits, have been reported. Universal gloving strategies in lieu of contact precautions have produced mixed results and raise concerns about a decrease in hand hygiene by glove wearers. We suggest that the use of a sound, horizontal infection prevention strategy that widely and consistently implements infection prevention best practices may be a sufficient and least restrictive alternative strategy for the control of endemic multidrug-resistant pathogens. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 31% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 19% |
| Korea, Democratic People's Republic of | 1 | 6% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 6% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| Brazil | 1 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 19% |
| Scientists | 3 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 24% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 25 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,747,698
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from Current Infectious Disease Reports
#31
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,025
of 172,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Infectious Disease Reports
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 172,679 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.