↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence of bacterial species in cats with clinical signs of lower urinary tract disease: Recognition of Staphylococcus felis as a possible feline urinary tract pathogen

Overview of attention for article published in Veterinary Microbiology, December 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
Prevalence of bacterial species in cats with clinical signs of lower urinary tract disease: Recognition of Staphylococcus felis as a possible feline urinary tract pathogen
Published in
Veterinary Microbiology, December 2006
DOI 10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.11.025
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annette Litster, Susan M. Moss, Mary Honnery, Bob Rees, Darren J. Trott

Abstract

This study investigated the prevalence of bacterial pathogens of the urinary tract in Australian cats. Urine was collected by cystocentesis and subjected to urinalysis, bacterial culture and susceptibility testing. A total of 126 isolates were obtained from 107 culture-positive cats. Escherichia coli was most commonly isolated (37.3% of isolates) with the majority of isolates showing susceptibility to the 14 antimicrobials tested. Just over a quarter of isolates (27.0%) were Enterococcus faecalis, which showed resistance to cephalosporins and clindamycin. Staphylococcus felis, a previously unreported feline urinary tract pathogen which was susceptible to all antimicrobial agents tested, comprised 19.8% of the isolates. S. felis was significantly associated with urine that had a higher specific gravity (p=0.011) and pH (p=0.006) and was more likely to contain crystals (p=0.002) than urine from which other bacterial species were isolated. This is the first published study that associates the isolation of S. felis with clinical signs of lower urinary tract disease in cats.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Unknown 99 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Other 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 31 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 33 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 35 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 November 2014.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Microbiology
#946
of 3,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,594
of 168,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Microbiology
#8
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,793 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 168,061 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.