↓ Skip to main content

FUNGEMIA POR SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE EM PACIENTE PEDIÁTRICO APÓS TRATAMENTO COM PROBIÓTICO

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Paulista de Pediatria, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
FUNGEMIA POR SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAE EM PACIENTE PEDIÁTRICO APÓS TRATAMENTO COM PROBIÓTICO
Published in
Revista Paulista de Pediatria, July 2017
DOI 10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;3;00014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariá Ribas Romanio, Ligia Augusto Coraine, Vinicius Pignoti Maielo, Marcelo Luiz Abramczyc, Renato Lopes de Souza, Nilton Ferraro Oliveira

Abstract

To report the case of a one-year-old patient with a bloodstream infection associated with probiotics, and to discuss the indications and precautions concerning the therapeutic use of probiotics. A one-year-old male patient with Down syndrome in a late postoperative period of congenital cardiac disease correction. The patient was severely malnourished and had been hospitalized since he was two months old in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. While in the hospital, the patient presented multiple infections related to mechanical ventilation and invasive devices, and received recurrent treatment with broadspectrum antibiotics for long periods. The patient developed chronic diarrhea and feeding intolerance, which lead to the use of probiotics (Saccharomyces boulardii) for four days. Two days after the end of the treatment, the patient developed septic shock, and the Saccharomyces cerevisiae was isolated in the central and peripheral blood cultures. After antifungal treatment (Amphotericin B), the blood cultures were negative. The patient had no further clinical complications after this event. Despite the well-documented benefits of probiotics in some clinical situations, we should be cautious about the indication of their use, preparation, and administration, in addition to the safe handling of invasive devices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 33%
Researcher 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Unknown 5 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 June 2019.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#113
of 511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,573
of 326,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Paulista de Pediatria
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 511 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 326,986 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.