↓ Skip to main content

Antimicrobial Resistance of Shigella flexneri Serotype 1b Isolates in China

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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 of Shigella flexneri Serotype 1b Isolates in China
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0129009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xianyan Cui, Chaojie Yang, Jian Wang, Beibei Liang, Shengjie Yi, Hao Li, Hongbo Liu, Peng Li, Zhihao Wu, Jing Xie, Leili Jia, Rongzhang Hao, Ligui Wang, Yuejin Hua, Shaofu Qiu, Hongbin Song

Abstract

Shigella flexneri serotype 1b is among the most prominent serotypes in developing countries, followed by serotype 2a. However, only limited data is available on the global phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of S. flexneri 1b. In the present study, 40 S. flexneri 1b isolates from different regions of China were confirmed by serotyping and biochemical characterization. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing showed that 85% of these isolates were multidrug-resistant strains and antibiotic susceptibility profiles varied between geographical locations. Strains from Yunnan were far more resistant than those from Xinjiang, while only one strain from Shanghai was resistant to ceftazidime and aztreonam. Fifteen cephalosporin resistant isolates were identified in this study. ESBL genes (blaSHV, blaTEM, blaOXA, and blaCTX-M) and ampC genes (blaMOX, blaFOX, blaMIR(ACT-1), blaDHA, blaCIT and blaACC) were subsequently detected among the 15 isolates. The results showed that these strains were positive only for blaTEM, blaOXA, blaCTX-M, intI1, and intI2. Furthermore, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis showed that the 40 isolates formed different profiles, and the PFGE patterns of Xinjiang isolates were distinct from Yunnan and Shanghai isolates by one obvious, large, missing band. In summary, similarities in resistance patterns were observed in strains with the same PFGE pattern. Overall, the results supported the need for more prudent selection and use of antibiotics in China. We suggest that antibiotic susceptibility testing should be performed at the start of an outbreak, and antibiotic use should be restricted to severe Shigella cases, based on resistance pattern variations observed in different regions. The data obtained in the current study might help to develop a strategy for the treatment of infections caused by S. flexneri 1b in China.

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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 19 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 6 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 16 36%
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 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#12,633,542
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#97,901
of 194,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,374
of 267,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,886
of 6,831 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 267,100 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,831 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 57% of its contemporaries.