↓ Skip to main content

Clinical relevance of bacterial resistance in lower respiratory tract infection in primary care: secondary analysis of a multicentre European trial

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Clinical relevance of bacterial resistance in lower respiratory tract infection in primary care: secondary analysis of a multicentre European trial
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, July 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x698333
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jolien Teepe, Berna DL Broekhuizen, Herman Goossens, Patricia Marinka Hordijk, Katherine Loens, Christine Lammens, Margareta Ieven, Paul Little, Chris C Butler, Samuel Coenen, Maciek Godycki-Cwirko, Birgitta Henriques-Normark, Theo JM Verheij, on behalf of the GRACE consortium

Abstract

The impact of antimicrobial resistance on clinical outcomes in patients with lower respiratory tract infection in primary care is largely unknown. To determine the illness course of infections with resistant bacteria in adults presenting to primary care with acute cough. Secondary analysis of a multicentre European trial in primary care. A total of 2061 adults with acute cough (lasting ≤28 days) were recruited from primary care and randomised to amoxicillin or placebo. To reflect the natural course of disease, only patients in the placebo group (n = 1021) were eligible. Nasopharyngeal flocked swabs and/or sputa (when available) were analysed at baseline and Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae isolates underwent susceptibility testing. Patients recorded their symptoms in a diary every day for 4 weeks. Patients with and without resistant bacterial infection were compared with regards to symptom severity, duration of symptoms, worsening of illness, and duration of interference with normal activities or work. Of the 834 patients with diary records, 104 showed S. pneumoniae and/or H. influenzae infection. Of this number, 54 (52%) were resistant to antibiotics, while seven (7%) were resistant to penicillin. For the duration of symptoms rated 'moderately bad or worse' (hazard ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67 to 2.44), mean symptom severity (difference -0.48, 95% CI = -1.17 to 0.21), and worsening of illness (odds ratio 0.31, 95% CI = 0.07 to 1.41), there was no statistically significant difference between the antibiotic-resistant and antibiotic-sensitive groups. The illness course of antibiotic-resistant lower respiratory tract infection does not differ from that caused by antibiotic-sensitive bacteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Lecturer 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 24 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 25 45%
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 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,661,147
of 23,322,258 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#2,474
of 4,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,116
of 330,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#57
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,258 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 4,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 330,534 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.