↓ Skip to main content

Severe Community-acquired Pneumonia Caused by Acinetobacter baumannii Successfully Treated with the Initial Administration of Meropenem Based on the Sputum Gram Staining Findings: A Case Report

Overview of attention for article published in Internal Medicine, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Severe Community-acquired Pneumonia Caused by Acinetobacter baumannii Successfully Treated with the Initial Administration of Meropenem Based on the Sputum Gram Staining Findings: A Case Report
Published in
Internal Medicine, September 2018
DOI 10.2169/internalmedicine.0787-18
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yurika Iwasawa, Naoto Hosokawa, Mariko Harada, Satoshi Hayano, Akihiko Shimizu, Daisuke Suzuki, Kei Nakashima, Makito Yaegashi

Abstract

A 62-year-old man with diabetes mellitus and a two-day history of fever and dyspnea presented at our hospital. He was diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), septic shock, and respiratory failure. Sputum Gram staining revealed Gram-negative coccobacilli. Based on the Gram staining findings and history, Acinetobacter baumannii was considered as one of the causative organisms of his CAP. Consequently, he was successfully treated with the initial administration of meropenem. We suggest that A. baumannii should be considered as one of the possible causative organisms of CAP based on a fulminant clinical course, and the presence of Gram-negative coccobacilli.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 14%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 6 27%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 50%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 5 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 06 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,199,358
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Internal Medicine
#394
of 2,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,623
of 347,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Internal Medicine
#6
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 347,925 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.