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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Antimicrobial activity evaluation and comparison of methods of susceptibility for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Enterobacter spp. isolates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.01.008 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniele Zendrini Rechenchoski, Angélica Marim Lopes Dambrozio, Ana Carolina Polano Vivan, Paulo Alfonso Schuroff, Tatiane das Neves Burgos, Marsileni Pelisson, Marcia Regina Eches Perugini, Eliana Carolina Vespero |
| Abstract |
The production of KPC (Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase) is the major mechanism of resistance to carbapenem agents in enterobacterias. In this context, forty KPC-producing Enterobacter spp. clinical isolates were studied. It was evaluated the activity of antimicrobial agents: polymyxin B, tigecycline, ertapenem, imipenem and meropenem, and was performed a comparison of the methodologies used to determine the susceptibility: broth microdilution, Etest(®) (bioMérieux), Vitek 2(®) automated system (bioMérieux) and disc diffusion. It was calculated the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for each antimicrobial and polymyxin B showed the lowest concentrations for broth microdilution. Errors also were calculated among the techniques, tigecycline and ertapenem were the antibiotics with the largest and the lower number of discrepancies, respectively. Moreover, Vitek 2(®) automated system was the method most similar compared to the broth microdilution. Therefore, is important to evaluate the performance of new methods in comparison to the reference method, broth microdilution. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 91 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 16% |
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 32 | 35% |
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 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#887
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,323
of 325,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 325,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.