| Title |
Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010427.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy, Rahul Koti, Clare D Toon, Peter Wilson, Brian R Davidson |
| Abstract |
Non surgical wounds include chronic ulcers (pressure or decubitus ulcers, venous ulcers, diabetic ulcers, ischaemic ulcers), burns and traumatic wounds. The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonisation (i.e. presence of MRSA in the absence of clinical features of infection such as redness or pus discharge) or infection in chronic ulcers varies between 7% and 30%. MRSA colonisation or infection of non surgical wounds can result in MRSA bacteraemia (infection of the blood) which is associated with a 30-day mortality of about 28% to 38% and a one-year mortality of about 55%. People with non surgical wounds colonised or infected with MRSA may be reservoirs of MRSA, so it is important to treat them, however, we do not know the optimal antibiotic regimen to use in these cases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 38% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 400 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 394 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 67 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 49 | 12% |
| Researcher | 37 | 9% |
| Other | 31 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 31 | 8% |
| Other | 90 | 23% |
| Unknown | 95 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 161 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 51 | 13% |
| Unknown | 117 | 29% |
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 06 May 2023.
All research outputs
#4,641,570
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,072
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,774
of 316,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#146
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 316,803 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.