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 |
Evaluation of the Commercial Kit SIRE Nitratase for detecting resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Brazil
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1590/0037-8682-0447-2016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Silvana Spindola de Miranda, Isabela Neves de Almeida, Maria Luiza Lopes, Jamilly Dos Reis de Figueiredo, Lida Jouca de Assis Figueredo, Afrânio Lineu Kritski, Wânia da Silva Carvalho, Maria de Fátima Filardi Oliveira Mansur |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to evaluate a new commercial kit, Kit SIRE Nitratase-PlastLabor, for testing the drug susceptibility of clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates. The accuracy of the Kit SIRE Nitratase was evaluated by examining the susceptibility (streptomycin, isoniazid, rifampicin, and ethambutol) of 40 M. tuberculosis isolates, using the proportion method with Lowenstein-Jensen medium or the BACTEC MGIT 960 system. The detection accuracy for streptomycin, isoniazid, rifampicin, and ethambutol was 95%, 97.5%, 100%, and 80%, respectively. The exceptional accuracy demonstrated by Kit SIRE Nitratase for isoniazid and rifampicin makes the kit an attractive option for screening M. tuberculosis strain resistance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
#498
of 1,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,361
of 327,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,193 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 327,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.