↓ Skip to main content

Development of a rapid MALDI-TOF MS based epidemiological screening method using MRSA as a model organism

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Development of a rapid MALDI-TOF MS based epidemiological screening method using MRSA as a model organism
Published in
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10096-017-3101-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Åsa Lindgren, Nahid Karami, Roger Karlsson, Christina Åhrén, Martin Welker, Edward R. B. Moore, Liselott Svensson Stadler

Abstract

In this study we present a method using whole cell MALDI-TOF MS and VITEK MS RUO/SARAMIS as a rapid epidemiological screening tool. MRSA was used as a model organism for setting up the screening strategy. A collection of well-characterised MRSA strains representing the 19 most common Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE)-types in the region of South-West Sweden for the past 20 years was analysed with MALDI-TOF MS. A total of 111 MRSA strains were used for creating 19 PFGE-specific Superspectra using VITEK MS RUO/SARAMIS. Prior to performing the final analysis, the 19 Superspectra were combined into ten groups displaying similar peak patterns, hereafter named "MALDI-types". Two-hundred fifty-five MRSA strains were analysed to test the constructed Superspectra/MALDI-type database. Matches to the Superspectra above a threshold of 65% (corresponding to the number of matched peaks in the Superspectrum) were considered as positive assignment of a strain to a MALDI-type. The median peak matching value for correct assignment of a strain to a MALDI-type was 78% (range 65.3-100%). In total, 172 strains (67.4%) were assigned to the correct MALDI-type and only 5.5% of the strains were incorrectly assigned to another MALDI-type than the expected based on the PFGE-type of the strain. We envision this methodology as a cost-efficient step to be used as a first screening strategy in the typing scheme of MRSA isolates, to exclude epidemiological relatedness of isolates or to identify the need for further typing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 16%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 10 26%
Unknown 10 26%
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 23 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,479,632
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#1,891
of 2,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,718
of 318,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#23
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 318,311 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.