Following rapid, global clonal dominance of hypervirulent ribotypes, Clostridium difficile now constitutes the primary infectious cause of nosocomial diarrhoea. Evidence indicates at least three possible mechanisms of hypervirulence that facilitates the successful invasion of these atypical strains: 1) increased infectiousness relative to endemic strains; 2) increased symptomatic disease rate relative to endemic strains; and 3) an ability to outcompete endemic strains in the host's gut. Stochastic simulations of an infection transmission model demonstrate clear differences between the invasion potentials of C. difficile strains utilising the alternative hypervirulence mechanisms, and provide new evidence that favours certain mechanisms (1 and 2) more than others (3). Additionally, simulations illustrate that direct competition between strains (inside the host's gut) is not a prerequisite for the sudden switching that has been observed in prevailing ribotypes; previously dominant C. difficile strains can be excluded by hypervirulent ribotypes through indirect (exploitative) competition.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 January 2021.
All research outputs
#5,762,930
of 33,738,238 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#44,712
of 181,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,754
of 297,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#520
of 2,116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,738,238 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 181,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.1. 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 297,587 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
