↓ Skip to main content

Increase in non-tuberculous mycobacteria isolated from humans in Tuscany, Italy, from 2004 to 2014

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Increase in non-tuberculous mycobacteria isolated from humans in Tuscany, Italy, from 2004 to 2014
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1380-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Rindi, Carlo Garzelli

Abstract

In Italy, the prevalence of non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) in human infections is largely unknown. Herein, we report the epidemiology of NTM infections in a region of central Italy, Tuscany, over the last 11 years, and provide a review of the recent literature on NTM isolation rates in different geographic regions. The complete collection of NTM strains isolated from a total of 42,055 clinical specimens at the Laboratory of Clinical Mycobacteriology of Pisa University Hospital, Italy, from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2014 was included. In our setting, in the period 2004-2014 a total of 147 patients had cultures positive for NTM. The number of NTM isolates increased considerably from five isolates in 2004 to 29 in 2014; a sharp increase occurred in the last 3 years. Overall, 16 NTM species were isolated; the most common were M. avium, M. intracellulare and M. gordonae detected in respectively in 41.5, 14.3 and 11.6 % of NTM patients. In general, NTM isolates were largely prevalent in people older than 60 (57.8 %); patients aged 1-10 year-old almost exclusively yielded M. avium and M. intracellulare. Of the 147 NTM clinical isolates, 76.2 % were from respiratory specimens, 10.9 % from lymph nodes, 2.7 % from blood (yielding exclusively M. avium), and the remaining 10.2 % from other clinical specimens. The observed increase in NTM isolation rate in our setting is in keeping with the general increase in NTM infections reported worldwide in the past two decades, although the distribution of the NTM prevalent species differs by geographic region.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 9 21%
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 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,303,950
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,473
of 7,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334,171
of 397,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#87
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,683 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 397,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.