↓ Skip to main content

Patient Perspectives on Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridium Difficile Infection

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Diseases and Therapy, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Patient Perspectives on Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridium Difficile Infection
Published in
Infectious Diseases and Therapy, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40121-016-0106-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Zellmer, Travis J. De Wolfe, Sarah Van Hoof, Rebekah Blakney, Nasia Safdar

Abstract

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a severe and increasingly frequent healthcare-associated infection that develops after disruption of the gut microbiota. Immunocompromised, hospitalized patients have an increased likelihood of acquiring CDI, leading to lengthened hospital stays, increased medical fees, and higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Treatment of CDI is challenging because of limited treatment options and a 19-20% recurrence rate. Thus, there is a need for effective, affordable and safe treatments for CDI. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is the transplantation of donor stool into the intestine of a CDI patient to restore the structure and function of the gut microbiota and eradicate CDI. Recently, FMT has become an attractive alternative treatment for CDI due to its overwhelming success rate. However, the patient perspective on the effect of CDI and the role of FMT in that context is lacking. We undertook a patient survey to gather qualitative and quantitative data on the short-term social, physical, emotional outcomes for patients with CDI who have undergone FMT. We found in all patients interviewed that the social implications of CDI were generally more severe than the emotional and physical aspects. Future studies should consider evaluating these important patient-centered factors as outcomes. Moreover, patients are willing to undergo FMT as treatment for CDI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Other 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 15 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 27 September 2021.
All research outputs
#4,679,211
of 25,452,734 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#203
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,072
of 315,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases and Therapy
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,452,734 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 315,734 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.