↓ Skip to main content

Antimicrobial resistance rates in gram-positive bacteria do not drive glycopeptides use

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Antimicrobial resistance rates in gram-positive bacteria do not drive glycopeptides use
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0181358
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beryl Primrose Gladstone, Andrea Cona, Parichehr Shamsrizi, Tuba Vilken, Winfred V. Kern, Nisar Malek, Evelina Tacconelli

Abstract

Surveillance data are considered essential to appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy and stewardship. The objective of this study was to determine if a change in the rates of antibiotic resistance impacts antibiotic use in European hospitals. Glycopeptides use was selected to study the correlation between resistance rates and antibiotic use because of the restricted spectrum against resistant gram positive bacteria. PubMed, ECDC databases and national/regional surveillance systems were searched to identify glycopeptides´ consumption in defined daily dose per 1000 inhabitant-days (DID) and rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), methicillin-resistant coagulase negative staphylococci (MRCoNS), and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in bloodstream infections (BSIs) in European countries between 1997 and 2015. Time trends were studied and associations between DID and BSI resistance rates were tested using multi-level mixed effect models. To account for the gap in the publication and dissemination of the yearly resistance data, a 2-year lag in the resistance rates was applied. Data on glycopeptides´ DID and resistance rates of target microorganisms in blood cultures were identified among 31 countries over a 19-year period. Glycopeptides use significantly increased (p<0·0001) while rates of MRSA BSIs decreased in majority of the countries (p<0·0001) and MRCoNS and VRE BSIs remained stable. Variation in glycopeptides' DID was not associated with variation in BSIs due to MRSA (p = 0·136) and VRE (p = 0·613). After adjusting for MRCoNS and VRE resistance rates, among 21 countries, 11 (52%) had a concordant and 10 (48%) a discordant trend in yearly glycopeptides´ DID and MRSA BSI rates. No correlation was found between resistance rates and DID data even among 8 countries with more than 5% decrease in MRSA rates over time. (RC -0·009, p = 0·059). Resistance rate of MRSA, MRCoNS, and VRE BSIs does not impact DID of glycopeptides in European hospitals. This finding is key to redefining the role and structure of antimicrobial surveillance and stewardship programmes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 5 9%
Lecturer 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 18 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,710,114
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#64,984
of 195,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,357
of 315,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,150
of 4,043 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 315,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,043 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.